Resection of esophageal leiomyoma using an endoscopic submucosal dissection technique

Surgical Treatment for Esophageal Leiomyoma: 13 Years of Experience in a High-Volume Tertiary Hospital

Background

Esophageal leiomyoma is the most common benign tumor in the esophagus. Thoracotomy and thoracoscopy are both elective for esophageal leiomyoma enucleation. This study aimed at presenting surgical experience in our center and exploring more suitable surgical methods for different situations.

Methods

We conducted this retrospective study by collecting data from patients who underwent esophageal leiomyoma enucleation through thoracotomy or thoracoscopy from January 2009 to November 2021 at West China Hospital Sichuan University.

Results

A total of 34 patients were enrolled for analysis. All patients were diagnosed with a single esophageal leiomyoma. There were 25 men and 9 women. The mean age was 44.41 years (range, 18–72 years), the mean longest diameter was 4.99 cm (range, 1.4–10 cm), and the esophagus was thoroughly circled with leiomyoma in 10 patients, 10 patients underwent thoracotomy to enucleate leiomyoma, while others underwent thoracoscopic enucleation. No perioperative deaths occurred. Between the thoracotomy group and thoracoscopy group, baseline characteristics were comparable except for gastric tube status (p = 0.034). Patients were inclined to undergo the left lateral surgery approach (p = 0.001) and suffered esophagus completely encircled by leiomyoma (p = 0.002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the left lateral surgery approach (p = 0.014) and esophagus completely encircled by leiomyoma (p = 0.042) were risk factors for thoracotomy of leiomyoma enucleation, while a larger tumor size demonstrated no risk. The median follow-up time was 63.5 months, and no deaths or recurrence occurred during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

Thoracotomy enucleation of the leiomyoma was recommended when the esophagus was thoroughly encircled by the leiomyoma and the left lateral surgery approach was needed. However, tumor size demonstrated less value for selecting a surgical approach.

Expanding indications for ESD: submucosal disease (SMT/carcinoid tumors)

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is useful for submucosal tumors (SMTs) within the superficial submucosal layer, but perforation frequently occurs during ESD for SMTs located at the deeper layer. Endoscopic resection for small esophageal SMTs is acceptable, although candidates for endoscopic removal are rare. Laparoscopic assistance will be effective for minimally invasive endoscopic local resection for certain types of gastric SMT. Endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation device would be better than ESD for rectal carcinoid in terms of simplicity and effectiveness.

Retrospective study of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) for surgical resection of esophageal leiomyoma

BACKGROUND

Esophageal leiomyoma is benign and often asymptomatic, but if the tumor is too large or obstructive, it should be resected. The aim of this study was to compare a novel approach, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD), with a more established method, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 39 patients in Chongqing Xinqiao Hospital, China, undergoing resection for leiomyoma >2 cm in diameter, or 1.5-2.0 cm in diameter with symptoms of obstructive dysphagia. Epidemiological data, presenting symptoms, diagnostic investigations, tumor location, histopathological findings, and safety and efficacy of surgical resection were analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean tumor sizes in the ESTD (n = 18; mean age = 36.7 ± 6.3 years) and ESD (n = 21; age = 41.0 ± 4.4 years) groups were 3.3 ± 0.7 and 3.0 ± 0.4 cm, respectively. The male:female ratio was 25:14, with a distribution of lesions among the lower, middle, and upper esophagus of 22:14:3. Operating time was significantly shorter (p < 0.05) for ESTD (67.5 ± 9.5 min) than for ESD (87.2 ± 7.7 min), while incision healing was faster (p < 0.05) for ESTD (14.7 ± 2.5 days) than for ESD (57.9 ± 7.5 days). Hospital stay was also shorter (p < 0.05) for ESTD (2.3 ± 0.5 days) than for ESD (5.7 ± 1.0 days). Bleeding was the only complication with ESTD (3/18 patients), with no significant difference in the incidence of complications between groups. ESTD was rapidly learned by surgeons.

CONCLUSION

ESTD is a safe and effective treatment for esophageal leiomyoma, with advantages over ESD.

[Endoscopic submucosal dissection: only for expert endoscopists?]

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be applied to early gastrointestinal cancers. This technique was developed to achieve radical curative resection and to reduce unnecessary surgical interventions. ESD was designed in eastern countries and is not widely used in the West. Although ESD represents a major therapeutic advance in endoscopy and is performed with curative intent, the complication rate (hemorrhage, perforation) is higher than reported in other techniques, requiring from endoscopists the acquirement of technical skill and experience through a structured and progressive training program to reduce the morbidity associated with this technique and increase its potential benefits. Although there is substantial published evidence on the applications and results of ESD, there are few publications on training in this technique and a standardized training program is lacking. The current article aims to describe the various proposals for training, as well as the basic principles of the technique, its indications, and the results obtained, since theoretical knowledge that would guide endoscopists during the clinical application of ESD is advisable before training begins. Training in an endoscopic technique has a little value without knowledge of the technique's aims, the situations in which it should be applied, and the results that can be expected.