Citations

Clear

6 citation(s) found for "Jang, Sunguk".

Journey to complete remission of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia after ESD and EMR of Barrett’s esophagus-related neoplasia
Joseph, Abel , Vantanasiri, Kornpong , Garg, Nikita , Codipilly, Don C. , Wang, Kenneth T. , Harmsen, William S. , Jang, Sunguk, Iyer, Prasad G. , Bhatt, Amit, Bhatt, Amit , Leggett, Cadman, Iyer, Prasad, Bhatt, Amit , Goyal, Rohit, Leggett, Cadman L. , Vargo, John Joseph

Mayo Clinic

Endoscopy International Open | March 18, 2025 | Volume: 13 | Issue: CP | Pages: No page available

10.1055/a-2422-2815 | PMID 40376017 Get It

AbstractAlthough endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is associated with higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates than cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR), its comparative impact on achieving complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) in BE endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is not well defined. We aimed to compare the journey of patients from initial endoscopic resection (ER) with ESD and cEMR to achieving CRD and CRIM.Patients undergoing ESD or cEMR followed by ablation for BE neoplasia at two academic institutions in the United States were included. Primary outcomes included CRD and CRIM rates following ER in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included the number of resection/ablative procedures from initial ER to achieving CRD and CRIM. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance confounding variables between groups.A total of 801 patients (606 cEMR, 195 ESD) were included. ESD group patients had higher en-bloc resection rates (ESD 94.4%, cEMR 44.7%). Higher rates of CRD were observed in patients undergoing initial ESD (HR 1.53, P < 0.01). With time-to-event and IPTW analyses, rates of achieving CRD and CRIM were comparable between the groups. There were no significant differences in mean number of endoscopic resection or ablative procedures among patients undergoing initial cEMR resection compared with those treated with initial ESD.Despite larger lesion sizes and more cancers in patients undergoing ESD, the EET journey to achieving CRD and CRIM was comparable to that in patients receiving cEMR. Prospective studies are required to further study differences between these two treatment approaches.
Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs. endoscopic mucosal resection for early Barrett's neoplasia in the West: a retrospective study
Pérez, Lady Katherine Mejía , Draganov, Peter V. , Jawaid, Salmaan , Chak, Amitabh , Dumot, John A. , Alaber, Omar , Jang, Sunguk , Mehta, Neal , Chua, Tiffany , Gabr, Moamen , Kudaravalli, Praneeth , Aihara, Hiroyuki , Ngamruengphong, Saowanee , Khoshknab, Milad Pourmousavi, Bhatt, Amit , Mejia Perez, Lady Katherine , Alaber, Omar , Fukami, Norio , Maluf-Filho, Fauze , Bhatt, Amit , Yang, Dennis J. , Vargo, John Joseph , Fukami, Norio

Mayo Clinic

Endoscopy | August 27, 2021 | Volume: 54 | Issue: 05 | Pages: 439-446

10.1055/a-1541-7659 | PMID 34450667 Get It

Abstract Background The difference in clinical outcomes after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia remains unclear. We compared the recurrence/residual tissue rates, resection outcomes, and adverse events after ESD and EMR for early BE neoplasia. Methods We included patients who underwent EMR or ESD for BE-associated high grade dysplasia (HGD) or T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) at eight academic hospitals. We compared demographic, procedural, and histologic characteristics, and follow-up data. A time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence/residual disease and a Kaplan–Meier curve was used to compare the groups. Results 243 patients (150 EMR; 93 ESD) were included. EMR had lower en bloc (43 % vs. 89 %; P < 0.001) and R0 (56 % vs. 73 %; P = 0.01) rates than ESD. There was no difference in the rates of perforation (0.7 % vs. 0; P > 0.99), early bleeding (0.7 % vs. 1 %; P > 0.99), delayed bleeding (3.3 % vs. 2.1 %; P = 0.71), and stricture (10 % vs. 16 %; P = 0.16) between EMR and ESD. Patients with non-curative resections who underwent further therapy were excluded from the recurrence analysis. Recurrent/residual disease was 31.4 % [44/140] for EMR and 3.5 % [3/85] for ESD during a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 15.5 (6.75–30) and 8 (2–18) months, respectively. Recurrence-/residual disease-free survival was significantly higher in the ESD group. More patients required additional endoscopic resection procedures to treat recurrent/residual disease after EMR (EMR 24.2 % vs. ESD 3.5 %; P < 0.001). Conclusions ESD is safe and results in more definitive treatment of early BE neoplasia, with significantly lower recurrence/residual disease rates and less need for repeat endoscopic treatments than with EMR.
396 Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Resection of T1b N0 Esophageal Cancer: Retrospective Multicenter Study
Pérez, Lady Katherine Mejía , Alaber, Omar , Jawaid, Salmaan , Chua, Tiffany , Kudaravalli, Praneeth , Mehta, Neal , Jang, Sunguk , Dumot, John A. , Gabr, Moamen , Aihara, Hiroyuki , Chak, Amitabh , Bhatt, Amit , Bhatt, Amit , Vargo, John Joseph , Fukami, Norio , Draganov, Peter V.

Mayo Clinic

American Journal of Gastroenterology | October 8, 2019 | Volume: 114 | Issue: 1 | Pages: S232-S232

10.14309/01.ajg.0000591116.86283.a4 Get It

INTRODUCTION: While esophagectomy is the standard treatment for submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and squamous cell cancer (SCC), many elderly patients -the age group that esophageal cancer tends to affect- are not candidates for surgery. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows for en-bloc resection of early esophageal cancer and allows for precise histopathologic staging of the tumor. ESD could be curative in submucosal cancer without lymph node metastasis, and it allows for precise histopathologic staging. To evaluate the long-term outcomes of ESD in patients with EUS-staged T1b esophageal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study was performed at three academic hospitals in the U.S. Patients who underwent ESD with a pre-procedural or post-procedural histopathologic diagnosis of T1b N0 M0 EAC or SCC were included in the study. Data was collected on demographics, tumor and procedure characteristics, procedure pathology, and follow-up. Local recurrence was confirmed by endoscopic findings and pathological analysis. Metastasis was confirmed by cross-sectional imaging. The main outcome was a composite of rate of metastasis and local recurrence. Follow-up time was defined as months from initial procedure to recurrence or last follow-up visit if recurrence-free. A time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients underwent ESD (mean age 69.6 years +/-9; 35 males) (Table 1). Based on available comorbidity data, 42% patients were not fit for surgery, as determined by an age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index > 6. Twenty tumors (62%) were found to be HGD or T1a on post-ESD specimen analysis, while one was staged as T2. Nineteen patients were staged as T1b after ESD. Immediately after ESD, 6 patients were referred for surgery, 3 underwent chemoradiation therapy, and 6 radiation alone (Table 2). Patients were followed for a median of 18 months, and the calculated 24-month recurrence rate was 13% (Figure 1). CONCLUSION: This multicenter trial showed that ESD for T1b esophageal cancer can be acceptable for patients who deemed not surgical candidates. However, close follow up is necessary. ESD can also serve as a staging procedure, as our data confirms inaccurate EUS-staging of T1b cancer, with 62% of tumors being down-staged to T1a, as has been previously reported.
355 Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection vs. Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Treatment of Barrett’s Related Superficial Esophageal Neoplasia
Pérez, Lady Katherine Mejía , Alaber, Omar , Jawaid, Salmaan , Chua, Tiffany , Kudaravalli, Praneeth , Khoshknab, Milad Pourmousavi, Mehta, Neal , Ngamruengphong, Saowanee , Jang, Sunguk , Dumot, John A. , Gabr, Moamen , Aihara, Hiroyuki , Chak, Amitabh , Bhatt, Amit , Bhatt, Amit , Vargo, John Joseph , Fukami, Norio , Draganov, Peter V.

Mayo Clinic

American Journal of Gastroenterology | October 8, 2019 | Volume: 114 | Issue: 1 | Pages: S209-S209

10.14309/01.ajg.0000590952.19457.8c Get It

INTRODUCTION: The difference in long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for Barrett’s related superficial neoplasia remains unclear. We aimed to compare the rates of local and metachronous recurrence of ESD and EMR in patients with clinically staged BE-associated high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). METHODS: Multicenter study at six academic hospitals in the U.S. including patients who underwent ESD for BE-HGD or T1a EAC. Primary outcome was a composite of metastasis and local recurrence rate. A time-to-event analysis was performed to evaluate recurrence. A Kaplan-Meier plot was constructed, and a log-rank test was used to compare the groups. A Cox hazard ratio regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 241 patients were included. 154 underwent EMR, while 84 underwent ESD (Table 1). ESD had higher en bloc (96% vs 33%, P < 0.0001), R0 (76% vs 54%, P = 0.0009) and curative resection rates (75% vs 32%, P < .0001) when compared to EMR. The 24-month local recurrence rate for EMR and ESD was 43% and 11%, respectively ( P = 0.0007) (Figure 1). Significantly more endoscopic resection procedures were required to treat recurrence after EMR compared to after ESD (Table 1). EMR, piecemeal resection, positive margins, and non-curative resection were identified as predictors of recurrence on univariate analysis. En bloc resection remained significant after multivariate analysis (Table 2). CONCLUSION: This multicenter study showed that ESD results in more definitive treatment of BE-associated early neoplasia than EMR, with significant lower recurrence rates and less need for repeat endoscopic therapeutic procedures than EMR.
Inpatient burden of esophageal cancer and analysis of factors affecting in-hospital mortality and length of stay
Sarvepalli, Shashank , Garg, Sushil Kumar , Parikh, Malav P., Jang, Sunguk , Thota, Prashanthi N. , Sanaka, Madhusudhan R. , Wadhwa, Vaibhav

Mayo Clinic

Diseases of the Esophagus | March 29, 2018 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 9 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/dote/doy022 | PMID 29617798 Get It

Summary Esophageal cancer (EC) continues to be a major source of morbidity and mortality in the United States. However, there has been a relative dearth of research into hospital utilization in patients with EC. This study examines temporal trends in hospital admissions, length of stay (LOS), mortality, and costs associated with EC. In addition, we also analyzed factors associated with inpatient mortality and LOS. We interrogated National Inpatient Sample (NIS), a large registry of inpatient data, to retrieve information about various demographic and factors associated with hospital stay in patients who were admitted for EC between the years 1998 and 2013 in the United States. After examining trends over time, multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with LOS and mortality. During 1998–2013, 538,776 hospital stays with principal diagnosis of EC were reviewed. Number of hospital stays and inpatient charges increased by 397 per year (±67.8;P &lt; 0.0001) and $3,033 per patient per year (±135; &lt;0.0001) respectively. Mortality and LOS decreased by 0.23% per year (±0.03;P &lt; 0.0001) and 0.07 days per year (±0.006;P &lt; 0.0001) respectively. Multiple factors associated with LOS and mortality were outlined. Despite overall increase in hospital utilization with respect to number of admissions and inpatient charges, inpatient mortality and LOS associated with EC declined. Factors associated with inpatient mortality and LOS may help drive clinical decision-making and influence healthcare or hospital policy.
Safety and efficacy of endoscopic spray cryotherapy for esophageal cancer.
Tsai, Franklin , Ghorbani, Shireen, Greenwald, Bruce D. , Jang, Sunguk , Dumot, John A. , McKinley, Matthew , Shaheen, Nicholas J. , Wolfsen, Herbert C. , Lightdale, Charles J. , Nishioka, Norman S., Johnston, Mark , Zfass, Alvin M., Coyle, Walter , Ghorbani, Shireen, Habr, Fadlallah G. , Abrams, Julian A

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 24, 2017 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 83-83

10.1200/jco.2016.34.4_suppl.83 Get It

83 Background: Although surgery is traditionally the standard of care for esophageal cancer, esophagectomy carries significant morbidity and mortality. Alternative endoscopic therapies are needed for patients who are not candidates for conventional treatment. The objective of this study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of spray cryotherapy of esophageal cancer. Methods: This study includes patients enrolled retrospectively and prospectively in an open-label registry and patients in a retrospective cohort from twelve academic and community practices. Endoscopic spray cryotherapy was performed until local tumor eradication was confirmed by biopsy or until treatment was halted due to progression of disease, patient withdrawal or co-morbidities. Results: One-hundred and eight patients (median age 75.5, 79.6% male, 93.5% adenocarcinoma, mean length 5.2 cm) underwent 442 treatments (mean 4.2 per patient). Tumor stages included 40 with T1a, 27 with T1b, 10 with unspecified T1, 15 with T2, and 16 with no T stage reported. One-hundred and six patients completed treatment with complete response of intraluminal disease in 54.7%, including complete response in 74.4% for T1a, 50% for T1b, 65.3% for all T1, 6.7% for T2, and 50% for those with no T stage reported. Mean follow-up was 17.3 months. There were no deaths or perforations related to spray cryotherapy. Strictures developed in 11 of 108 patients (10.2%) but were present before spray cryotherapy in 3 of 11. Conclusions: This study suggests that endoscopic spray cryotherapy is safe, well tolerated and effective for early esophageal cancer in patients who are not candidates for conventional therapy.