• Journal of Digestive Cancer Research
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.16-21
• /
• 2022

Diagnosis of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs) is sometimes difficult with conventional endoscopy or tissue sampling with standard biopsy, so non-invasive imaging modalities such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography are used to evaluate the characteristics of SETs features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape). However imaging modalities alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SETs, so histology is the gold standard for obtaining the final diagnosis. For tissue sampling, mucosal cutting biopsy and mucosal incision-assisted biopsy and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration or biopsy (EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB) is commonly recommended. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used for resection of SETs involving the mucosal and superficial submucosal layers, could not treat adequately and safely the SETs involving the deep mucosa and muscularis propria. Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is used as a therapeutic option for the treatment of SETs with the development of reliable endoscopic closure techniques and tools.

• Clinical Endoscopy
• /
• 제55권5호
• /
• pp.615-625
• /
• 2022

Background/Aims: Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) for tissue acquisition (TA) from subepithelial lesions (SELs) is emerging as an alternative to endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided TA. Only a limited number of studies compared the diagnostic utility of MIAB and EUS for upper gastrointestinal (GI) SELs; therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A comprehensive literature search from January 2020 to January 2022 was performed to compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety of MIAB and EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs. Results: Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled technical success rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.04) and procedural time (mean difference=-4.53 seconds; 95% CI, -22.38 to 13.31] were comparable between both the groups. The overall chance of obtaining a positive diagnostic yield was lower with EUS than with MIAB for all lesions (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98) but comparable when using a fine-needle biopsy needle (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.04). The positive diagnostic yield of MIAB was higher for lesions <20 mm (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.89). Six studies reported no adverse events. Conclusions: MIAB can be considered an effective alternative to EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs without an increased risk of adverse events.