Safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection of large (≥3 cm) subepithelial tumors located in the cardia.

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors (SETs) may harbor potential malignancy. Although it is well recognized that large SETs should be resected, the treatment strategy remains controversial. Compared to surgical resection, endoscopic resection has many advantages such as less invasive, shorter hospital stay, lower costs, and better quality of life. However, Endoscopic resection of large SETs in the cardia is challenging. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of such SETs. METHODS: A total of 41 patients with large SETs (≥3 cm in diameter) located in the cardia were involved in the study. All patients underwent ESD. Data on therapeutic outcomes and follow-up were collected, for analysis of risk factors of complication rates. RESULTS: The average tumor size was 4.7 ± 1.7 cm. The average procedure time was 69.3 ± 32.7 min and the average postoperative hospital stay was 3.5 ± 1.1 days. A total of 41 tumors were removed successfully, in which 35 were leiomyomas, three were gastrointestinal stromal tumors, two were lipomas, and one was gastritis cystica profunda. The en bloc resection rate was 90.2%, and was significantly higher for tumors with a round or oval shape (100%) than for those with an irregular shape (75.0%) (P < 0.05). Five patients experienced complications (12.2%), all of which were managed conservatively. The complication rates were significantly higher in patients with a tumor originating from the deep muscularis propria layer and demonstrating a trans-cardia growth pattern. No residual or tumor recurrence was observed and no stricture occurred during the follow-up period (average, 26.7 ± 18.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: ESD is safe and effective to curatively remove most large SETs in the cardia, and may serve as an accurate histopathology measurement to direct future therapy.

Diabetes Mellitus in a Malaysian Teaching Hospital: Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Frequency of Testing for Hypercholesterolaemia, Proteinuria and HbAlc.

We examined the prevalence of diabetes among inpatients in our hospital, the relationship of the diagnoses on admission to diabetes, and the frequency of testing for HbA1c as a marker of long-term glycaemic control, proteinuria, and hypercholesterolaemia. In addition, patients with raised laboratory plasma glucose without a know history of diabetes mellitus, were studied to see if these had been further evaluation. The overall prevalence of diabetes in our hospital was 25.% with the highest prevalence found (37.8%) on medical wards. 10.5% of admissions were due directly to diabetes and a further 58.9% of patients were admitted with illness which were significant related to diabetes. Overall testing rates for HbA31c, proteinuria, and hypercholesterolaemia were less than ideal (51.6, 73.4 and 45.% respectively). Less than 50% of patients without previously diagnosed diabetes but with high plasma glucose values had further evaluation for diabetes. In conclusion, this study has detected a high overall prevalence of diabetes among inpatients in an urban Malaysian hospital. Rates of testing for HbA51c, proteinuria, and hypercholesterolaemia, are disappointingly low, as is further evaluation of patients without known diabetes, but with elevated glucose values. More effective measures to improve the delivery of inpatient diabetes care are needed.