Background: The feasibility of endoscopic dissection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (gGIST) between 2 and 5 cm in size has been demonstrated. However, its impact on short-term and long-term outcomes, compared with laparoscopic resection, is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic resection and endoscopic dissection for 2-5-cm gGIST.
Methods: A case-matched study was performed using the propensity score. To overcome selection bias, we performed a 1:1 match using six covariates, including age, sex, BMI, ASA score, tumor size, and tumor location. Short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic resection and endoscopic dissection were compared.
Results: A total of 210 patients with 2-5-cm gGIST were enrolled between 2006 and 2017 in our gastrointestinal center. According to the intention-to-treat approach, 165 patients underwent laparoscopic resection, and 45 patients underwent endoscopic dissection. After the propensity score, 45 pairs were balanced and analyzed. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics between the laparoscopic and endoscopic groups after matching. The rate of complications was significantly higher in the endoscopic group compared with the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). Perforations occurred in 16 patients in the endoscopic group (16/45, 35.6%). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the endoscopic group compared with the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in disease-free survival or overall survival.
Conclusion: Laparoscopic resection is better than endoscopic dissection for 2-5-cm gGIST because of the lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay.
Keywords: Case-matched study; Endoscopic dissection; Gastrointestinal stromal tumor; Laparoscopic resection; Prognosis.