Comparative Study on the Clinical Effects of Different Surgical Methods in the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

Abstract

Objective. The objective is to compare the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic resection (LAP), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Methods. The clinical data of 105 patients who were treated in our hospital and diagnosed with GIST by pathology after surgery from March 2019 to March 2021 were collected. Patients were divided into the LAP group, EFR group, and ESD group according to different surgical methods. The clinical data, surgical conditions, complications, and postoperative conditions of the patients were recorded retrospectively. Patients were followed up closely after surgery. Results. The operation time of the EFR group and ESD group was shorter than that of the LAP group, and the operation time of the EFR group was shorter than that of the ESD group ( $P<0.05$ ). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the EFR group and ESD group was lower than that in the LAP group ( $P<0.05$ ). There was no significant difference in the complete resection rate among the three groups ( $P>0.05$ ). There was no significant difference in the total incidence of complications among the three groups ( $P>0.05$ ). The postoperative abdominal pain time, postoperative hospital stay, and total hospitalization costs of the EFR group and ESD group were lower than those of the LAP group ( $P<0.05$ ). No recurrence or metastasis cases were found in the three groups during the follow-up period, and there were no GIST-related deaths in the three groups. Conclusion. LAP, EFR, and ESD have good curative effect, good safety, and good prognosis in the treatment of GIST. But compared with LAP, EFR and ESD have the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, shorter hospitalization time, and lower hospitalization cost.