Results: In total, 149 and 4 patients were diagnosed with early cancer and advanced cancer. Almost all them had atrophic gastritis. The proportion of endoscopically treatable gastric cancers was not significantly difference between the 2 groups (Group A vs
Group B: 81.3% vs 80.0%, P = 0.884). In addition, the proportion of advanced gastric cancers was not significantly difference (Group A vs Group B: 1.5% vs 8.0%, P = 0.065). Conclusion: Annual endoscopy MK-2206 cell line cannot facilitate the detection of endoscopically treatable gastric cancers compared with biennial endoscopy. Because there is little number of cases, it is necessary to repeat further examination. Key Word(s): 1. Screening endoscope; 2. gastric cancer Presenting Author: MATTHEW SMITH Additional Authors: ANDRE CHONG, MARCUS CHIN, SIMON EDMUNDS, SPIRO RAFTOPOULOS, YUSOFF
IAN, DEV SEGARAJASINGAM, CHIANG SIAH Corresponding Author: MATTHEW SMITH Affiliations: Fremantle Hospital, Royal Perth Hospital, Royal Perth Hospital, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Royal Perth Hospital Objective: Whilst surgery is advocated for large gastric GISTs (20–30 mm +), management of small (<20 mm) lesions is controversial. A strategy of endoscopic ultrasound surveillance is commonly used, but data on its utility is limited. We analysed our experience in evaluation and surveillance buy NVP-AUY922 of gastric GISTs in Western MCE公司 Australia across all tertiary centres. Methods: All patients undergoing EUS for the evaluation of a gastric subepithelial lesion in Western Australia between
February 2002 and May 2014 were identified. Data was represented as mean or median +/− range as appropriate. Results: 263 patients with gastric subepithelial lesions were identified. EUS diagnosis was GIST in 161 cases (62%). 77 of the endosonographically suspected GISTs were recommended for surveillance. Of these, 55 patients proceeded to EUS surveillance, male 27 (49%) with mean age 59.1. Mean size of lesion 14.5 mm (range 6–40 mm). 155 EUS procedures were performed with mean number of EUSs per patient 2.8 (range 2–7). Mean time of EUS follow up was 33 months, median 26 months (range 4–113 months). In this time mean change in size was −0.65 mm, median 0 (range −19 to +5 mm). Longer follow up time had no relation to change in size. 5 patients (9%) went for surgery after a surveillance period of 5.0, 5.8, 13.6, 26.3 and 27.3 months respectively. 3 lesions were ≥30 mm on first EUS and indication was new lymph nodes (1) and cystic areas (2). The remaining 2 lesions were 20 mm and grew by 1 mm and 5 mm on first FU respectively. Histopathology showed no high risk lesions; low risk GIST 2, leiomyoma 2, schwannoma 1. Conclusion: In our cohort, there appears to be little evidence of significant growth of small gastric GISTs with up to 9 years of EUS follow up.