Background
There have been no comparative studies of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) for patients with duodenal tumors regarding surgical outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and feasibility of short-term surgical outcomes of ESD and LECS for patients with low-risk tumors of the duodenum.
Methods
This was a single-center retrospective study of 68 consecutive patients with low-risk tumors of the duodenum who received surgical treatments. ESD (
n
 = 50) was performed between 2000 and 2013 and LECS (
n
 = 18) was performed between 2014 and 2017.
Results
The overall incidence of perioperative complications was significantly higher in the ESD group (28%) than in the LECS group (0%) (
P
 = 0.014). In the ESD group, eight patients with intraoperative perforation of duodenum (16%) were repaired with metal clips. Postoperative duodenal hemorrhage occurred in three patients (6%). Postoperative duodenal stricture requiring endoscopically guided balloon dilation was observed in two patients (4%). Postoperative bile leakage was found in one patient (2%). The size of resected lesion was significantly larger in the LECS group (26.5 mm) than in the ESD group (14.5 mm) (
P
 = 0.003). In LECS group, all 18 patients underwent curative resection; however, the curative resection rate was 52% in ESD group (
P
 = 0.001).
Conclusion
LECS for patients with low-risk tumors of the duodenum is a safe, feasible, and ideal alternative to ESD with regard to short-term surgical outcomes.
Trial Registration
UMIN000021200 (
http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/
)...

Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for the Treatment of Low-Risk Tumors of the Duodenum

10.1007/s11605-018-3680-6