Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 13 (5), 515-521

Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Risk of Peritoneal Seeding After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer: A Focus on Perforation During the Procedure


Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Risk of Peritoneal Seeding After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer: A Focus on Perforation During the Procedure

Cheal Wung Huh et al. Gut Liver.


Background/aims: The risk of peritoneal seeding following perforation after endoscopic resection in patients with early gastric cancer is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate long-term clinical outcomes including peritoneal seeding and overall survival rate following gastric perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).

Methods: Between January 2002 and March 2015, 556 patients were diagnosed with early gastric cancer and underwent ESD. Among them, 34 patients (6.1%) experienced gastric perforation during ESD. Clinicopathological data of these patients were reviewed to determine the clinical outcome and evidence of peritoneal seeding.

Results: Among 34 patients with perforation, macroperforations occurred during ESD in 17 cases (50%), and microperforation was identified in the remaining 17 cases (50%). All patients except one who underwent emergency surgery due to severe panperitonitis were managed successfully by endoscopic clipping (n=27) or conservative medical treatment (n=6). No evidence of peritoneal seeding after perforation associated with ESD was found in our cohort. Cumulative survival rates did not differ between the perforation and non-perforation groups (p=0.691). Furthermore, mortality was not associated with perforation. In addition, multivariate analysis showed that tumor size and achievement of curative resection were related to cancer recurrence. Perforation was not associated with cancer recurrence and survival.

Conclusions: Perforation associated with ESD does not lead to worse clinical outcomes such as peritoneal seeding or cumulative survival rate. Therefore, periodic follow-up might be possible if curative resection was achieved even if perforation occurred during ESD.

Keywords: Early gastric cancer; Endoscopic submucosal dissection; Perforation; Peritoneal seeding.

Conflict of interest statement


No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.


Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Clinical outcomes of 34 patients with perforation during endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Cumulative survival rates between perforation and non-perforation groups. ESD, endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 1 PubMed Central articles


    1. Kato M, Nishida T, Yamamoto K, et al. Scheduled endoscopic surveillance controls secondary cancer after curative endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: a multicentre retrospective cohort study by Osaka University ESD study group. Gut. 2013;62:1425–1432. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301647. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim SG. Endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancer. J Gastric Cancer. 2011;11:146–154. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2011.11.3.146. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Isomoto H, Shikuwa S, Yamaguchi N, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a large-scale feasibility study. Gut. 2009;58:331–336. doi: 10.1136/gut.2008.165381. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Toyonaga T, Man-i M, East JE, et al. 1,635 Endoscopic submucosal dissection cases in the esophagus, stomach, and colorectum: complication rates and long-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1000–1008. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2555-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kim M, Jeon SW, Cho KB, et al. Predictive risk factors of perforation in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a large, multicenter study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1372–1378. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2618-4. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources