
doi: 10.1111/den.12003
pmid: 23362925
Endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer is a well‐established standard therapy in Japan and Korea, and is increasingly used in other countries. Endoscopic resection should be curative for patients, and safe, easy and effective not only for patients, but also for endoscopists. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is superior to standard endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as it is designed to provide en bloc R0 resection regardless of size and/or location. Correct pathological assessment of en bloc resected specimens is crucial for accurate diagnosis and patient stratification for the risk of metastasis. Outcome studies in Japan and Korea, countries with the highest incidence of gastric cancer, have shown that ESD is efficacious in leading to a good long‐term outcome; however, ESD requires an experienced endoscopist with a high skill level. Expanded indications for endoscopic resection have been proposed, especially after large en bloc resection have been accomplished using ESD. The use of ESD could be of huge benefit for the management of gastrointestinal superficial neoplasms. However, for ESD to become a viable therapeutic option, it requires close and supportive working relationships between endoscopists, pathologists and surgeons.
Dissection, Equipment Design, Adenocarcinoma, Prognosis, Adenocarcinoma, Papillary, Treatment Outcome, Japan, Gastric Mucosa, Stomach Neoplasms, Lymphatic Metastasis, Gastroscopy, Republic of Korea, Disease Progression, Humans, Mass Screening, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Precancerous Conditions, Follow-Up Studies, Neoplasm Staging
Dissection, Equipment Design, Adenocarcinoma, Prognosis, Adenocarcinoma, Papillary, Treatment Outcome, Japan, Gastric Mucosa, Stomach Neoplasms, Lymphatic Metastasis, Gastroscopy, Republic of Korea, Disease Progression, Humans, Mass Screening, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Precancerous Conditions, Follow-Up Studies, Neoplasm Staging
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 81 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
