BACKGROUND: The prognosis comparison between endoscopic therapy + partial splenic embolization (PSE) and Hassab\'s operation is unclear in the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. This study aimed to compare the outcome of endoscopic therapy + PSE (EP) with a combination of splenectomy + pericardial devascularization procedure, known as Hassab\'s operation (SH) for esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis with hypersplenism.
METHODS: We enrolled 328 patients, including 125 and 203 patients who underwent EP and SH, respectively. Each group consisted of 110 patients after propensity score matching (PSM). Subsequently, we recorded and analyzed bleeding episodes and mortality in 6 months and 1, 2, and 5 years after therapies.
RESULTS: The median follow-up time in the EP and SH groups was 53 and 64 months, respectively. Bleeding incidence 6 months after therapies in the EP group was lower than that in the SH group (1.8% vs. 10.0%, P = 0.010). Additionally, complications in the perioperative period were not significantly different (0% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.008). However, the bleeding rate between the two groups was not significantly different at 1, 2, and 5 years after therapies (7.3% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.157; 10.9% vs. 16.4%, P = 0.205; 30.6% vs. 31.8%, P = 0.801), as well as mortality rate (4.5% vs 7.3%, P = 0.571).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SH therapy, the bleeding rate 6 months after EP therapy was lower, but the long-term bleeding rate was similar.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic rubber band ligation (ERBL) is a nonsurgical technique for the treatment of symptomatic internal hemorrhoids but is limited by recurrence and post-procedural pain.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate satisfaction, long-term recurrence, and post-procedural pain in managing internal hemorrhoids using a combination of polidocanol foam sclerotherapy and ERBL.
METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized study. A total of 195 consecutive patients diagnosed with grade II-III internal hemorrhoids were enrolled from four tertiary hospitals and randomly divided into a cap-assisted endoscopic polidocanol foam sclerobanding (EFSB) or an ERBL group. All patients were followed-up for 12 months. Symptom-based severity and post-procedural pain were assessed using a hemorrhoid severity score (HSS) and a visual analog scale (VAS). Continuous variables were reported as medians and interquartile range.
RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-five patients were enrolled, with 98 in the EFSB group. HSS was lower in the EFSB group than in the ERBL group at 8 weeks [4.0 (3.0-5.0) vs 5.0 (4.0-6.0), P = 0.003] and 12-month [2.0 (1.0-3.0) vs 3.0 (2.0-3.0), P < 0.001] of follow-up. The prolapse recurrence rate was lower in the EFSB group at 12 months (11.2% vs 21.6%, P = 0.038). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that EFSB treatment [B = -0.915, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.301 to -0.530, P = 0.001] and rubber band number (B = 0.843, 95%CI: 0.595-1.092, P < 0.001) were negatively and independently associated with the VAS score 24 hours post-procedure. The median VAS was lower in the EFSB group than in the ERBL [2.0 (1.0-3.0) vs 3.0 (2.0-4.0), P < 0.001].
CONCLUSIONS: Cap-assisted EFSB provided long-term satisfaction and effective relief from the recurrence of prolapse and pain 24 hours post-procedure.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a common treatment for pancreatic stones in chronic pancreatitis. In contrast, peroral pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy (POPS-L) remains underexplored, with limited comparative studies to ESWL. This study compared the treatment outcomes of disposable POPS-L tools and ESWL for pancreatic stones.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 66 patients who had undergone pancreatic stone treatment at three institutions between 2006 and 2022. The treatment outcomes of POPS-L and ESWL were compared.
RESULTS: This study included 19 and 47 patients who had undergone POPS-L and ESWL, respectively. In a comparison between POPS-L and ESWL, the stone clearance rates were 78.9% vs. 70.2% (p = 0.55), while the procedure-related complication rates were 21% vs. 6.3% (p = 0.09). The median total session counts were 1 vs. 5 (p < 0.01). The cumulative stone recurrence rates were comparable in both groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no significant factors influencing the stone clearance rates, and the choice between POPS-L and ESWL did not affect the stone clearance rates.
CONCLUSIONS: POPS-L and ESWL exhibited comparable treatment outcomes in terms of stone clearance, complications, and recurrence rates. Furthermore, POPS-L is advantageous due to the need for fewer sessions to achieve pancreatic stone clearance.

UNASSIGNED: Sarcopenia is a common complication of liver cirrhosis and can be used for predicting dismal prognostic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the role of sarcopenia in rebleeding and mortality of liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic therapy.
UNASSIGNED: The liver cirrhosis patients who received endoscopic treatment were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to overcome selection bias. Two-year rebleeding episodes and mortality after endoscopic therapy were recorded.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 109 (32.4%) sarcopenia patients were reported. Before PSM, the frequency of rebleeding was significantly higher in the sarcopenia group relative to the non-sarcopenia group (41.3% vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001). Moreover, the multivariable analysis revealed that sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:2.596, 95% CI 1.591-4.237) was independently associated with a 2-year rebleeding episode. After PSM, the sarcopenia group exhibited an increased rebleeding rate as compared with non-sarcopenia group (44.4% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.001). According to multivariable analysis, sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:3.490, 95% CI 1.756-6.938) was identified as a significant predictor for 2-year rebleeding.
UNASSIGNED: Sarcopenia was significantly associated with a high 2-year rebleeding rate in liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic treatment. Therefore, the precise evaluation of a patient\'s nutritional status, including sarcopenia becomes mandatory before endoscopic treatment.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic therapy (ET) of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) has become a viable treatment. We intended to compare long-term outcomes of ET versus surgical resection for 2-5 cm GIST using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.
METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted to compare the long-term outcomes of patients treated with ET and surgical resection for GIST. The multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify predictors for patients survival. To balance the clinicopathologic characteristics, a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized.
RESULTS: A total of 749 patients with 2-5 cm GIST were enrolled, of whom 113 accepted ET and 636 underwent surgical resection. Before PSM, there was no significant difference in long-term outcomes between ET and surgical resection (5-year overall survival (OS): 93.5% vs. 91.6%, P=0.374; 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS): 99.1% vs. 96.5%, P=0.546; 10-year OS: 71.1% vs. 78.2%, P=0.374; 10-year CSS: 93.6% vs. 92.7%, P=0.546). After adjusting for the relevant variables using the multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, we observed that the ET and surgical resection groups were similar in OS (HR 0.726, 95%CI 0.457-1.153, P=0.175) and CSS (HR 1.286, 95%CI 0.474-3.488, P=0.621). After PSM, the long-term OS and CSS of patients with 2-5 cm GIST after ET and surgical resection were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the long-term survival of patients with 2-5 cm gastric GIST after ET and surgical resection were comparable. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm the role of ET in 2-5 cm GIST.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic full-thickness gastric resection (EFTGR) with laparoscopic regional lymph node dissection (LLND) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with LLND have been investigated as treatment options for early gastric cancer beyond the absolute indications for ESD. However, comparative studies on the long-term outcomes of these procedures are lacking. This study aimed to analyze and compare the 10-year outcomes of both procedures in a real clinical setting.
METHODS: Between January 2009 and December 2013, 28 and 37 patients diagnosed with EGC beyond the absolute indications for ESD were treated with EFTGR with LLND and ESD with LLND, respectively. In both procedures, the dye was injected into the tumor. However, after injection and LLND, EFTGR was performed immediately in the EFTGR with LLND group, whereas LLND was followed by ESD in the ESD with LLND group. The primary endpoint was the 10-year survival rate.
RESULTS: The EFTGR with LLND group had one case of local recurrence (3.6%) and mortality (3.6%) each, while the ESD with LLND group had none (0.0% for both); however, the differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.247 for each). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in complications such as ischemia and anastomosis leakage between the groups (P = 0.247).
CONCLUSIONS: When the procedures were properly applied, EFTGR with LLND and ESD with LLND did not increase the 10-year mortality in patients with EGC beyond the absolute ESD indications compared with conventional radical gastrectomy.

UNASSIGNED: Endoscopic therapy is an optional strategy for the treatment of esophageal cancer (EC) under an early stage, especially stage T1a. However, its efficacy in the treatment of T1b EC has not been thoroughly assessed. We investigated the efficacy of esophagectomy, endoscopic therapy, as well as chemoradiotherapy in patients with T1bN0M0 EC.
UNASSIGNED: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER) was employed to identify patients diagnosed with T1bN0M0 EC. Patient demographics were compared among the endoscopic therapy, esophagectomy, and chemoradiotherapy groups. Our study employed Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression model to evaluate patient outcomes and long-term survival rates. The overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were compared among patients with EC who underwent endoscopic therapy or esophagectomy, employing propensity score matching (PSM).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 820 patients diagnosed with T1bN0M0 EC were identified. The number of patients who received endoscopic therapy, esophagectomy, and chemoradiotherapy was 173, 556, and 91, respectively. Patients subjected to endoscopic therapy and esophagectomy had greatly longer OS and CSS than those who underwent chemoradiotherapy. Patients treated with esophagectomy had longer OS than endoscopic therapy patients, but there were no differences in CSS between the two groups. PSM generated 153 patient pairs among T1bN0M0 patients, demonstrating that both the esophagectomy and endoscopic therapy groups exhibited comparable OS and CSS rates.
UNASSIGNED: Endoscopic therapy and esophagectomy were associated with a significant survival advantage compared with chemoradiotherapy in patients with T1bN0M0 EC. In contrast, after PSM, among the EC patients with stage T1bN0M0, OS and CSS did not differ after endoscopic therapy or esophagectomy. These results indicate that endoscopic therapy could be a viable alternative to esophagectomy in patients diagnosed with T1bN0M0 EC.

UNASSIGNED: The growing numbers of early esophageal cancer (EEC) have increased the demand for endoscopic therapy.
UNASSIGNED: To clarify the influential factors for the prognosis of patients with EEC receiving endoscopic surgery, and to construct a nomogram to evaluate the prognostic value of endoscopic therapy.
UNASSIGNED: Prognostic analysis study.
UNASSIGNED: Clinical data of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy between 2004 and 2015 were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and used to construct the nomogram. The prognosis was analyzed by R language; the nomogram was constructed by Cox survival analysis; and the accuracy of the nomogram was verified by C index and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and calibration curves. X-Tile software was used to stratify the risk of patients.
UNASSIGNED: Our study constructed the nomogram of the prognosis of patients with EEC treated by endoscopic surgery, including 1118 patients and 5 independent prognostic factors of esophageal cancer-specific survival. The C index and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the training and verification cohorts were all >0.75. The calibration curve also reflected the good consistency of the model in predicting survival. Significant difference in the risk of patients from different stratifications with the same T staging existed, and the model had a better C index than that of the T staging.
UNASSIGNED: Our study reports potential influential factors affecting the prognosis of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy and establishes a reliable nomogram to predict the risk and prognosis, which has certain advantages compared with traditional TNM staging system.

Cervical anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy cause significant disease burden. We aimed to study the technical feasibility and safety of intensive endoscopic therapy.
In this pilot study, we included 15 patients with an untreated benign cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. Intensive endoscopic therapy comprised three endoscopic modalities: in- and excision using a needle-knife, intralesional steroid injections and bougie dilation. In two endoscopic procedures, the stricture was dilated up to a luminal diameter of 18 mm. Patients were followed up to 6 months.
A luminal diameter of 18 mm was achieved in 13 of 15 patients (87%) after two endoscopic procedures. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment occurred. Median dysphagia scores significantly improved from 2 (IQR, interquartile range, 2-3) at baseline to 0 (IQR 0-1) after 14 days (p < 0.001). Eleven (73%) patients developed recurrent symptoms of dysphagia requiring a median of 1 (IQR 0-3) additional endoscopic dilation procedure.
Achieving a luminal diameter of 18 mm in two procedures with intensive endoscopic therapy was technically feasible and effective in reducing dysphagia rapidly in patients with a cervical anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. No major adverse events related to the investigational treatment were observed.

Current guidelines recommend consideration of endoscopic therapy (ET) when treating selected early gastric cancers. However, clinical decision-making on ET versus gastrectomy for early adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEGJ) remains challenging because of uncertain long-term outcomes.
We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2017 of early AEGJ patients underwent ET or gastrectomy. Multivariate models were used to compare cancer-specific survival (CSS).
Of 881 included early AEGJ patients, 227 (36.2%) patients underwent ET and 654 (63.8%) patients underwent gastrectomy. Early AEGJ patients who underwent ET experienced a similar hazard of cancer-specific death compared with those underwent gastrectomy in both multivariate Cox regression (HR [hazard ratio], 0.93; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.55-1.56; P = 0.78) and the multivariate competing risk model (subdistribution HR [SHR], 0.86; 95% CI 0.50-1.45; P = 0.56). Propensity score matching was used, 210 patients underwent ET were matched with 210 patients underwent gastrectomy. Patients underwent ET experienced a similar hazard of cancer-specific death compared with those underwent gastrectomy in both multivariate Cox regression (HR, 0.97; 95% CI 0.53-1.77; P = 0.92) and the multivariate competing risk model (SHR, 0.96; 95% CI 0.52-1.77; P = 0.89).
Early AEGJ patients who received ET or gastrectomy had comparable long-term outcomes, which lend support to the role of ET in the treatment of these patients.