Comparison between ESD and RFA in patients with total or near-total circumferential early esophageal squamous cell neoplasia.

backgroundPatients with early esophageal squamous cell neoplasias (ESCNs) that are totally or nearly totally circumferential face challenges in their clinical work. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) frequently leads to esophageal strictures. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA), which stands out for its simplicity of use and low rate of stenosis, is a rapidly evolving therapeutic strategy for early ESCNs. We contrast ESD with RFA in order to find which method is best for the treatment of a wide range of esophageal diseases.

methodsPatients who had flat-type, early, large ESCNs (extending more than 3/4 of the esophageal circumference) treated endoscopically were enrolled retrospectively. The primary outcome measurements were adverse events and local control of the neoplastic lesion.

resultsA total of 105 patients received treatment; 60 had ESD and 45 received RFA. Despite the patients receiving RFA typically having larger tumors (14.27 vs. 5.70 cm, P < 0.05), the local control of the neoplastic lesion and procedure-related complications were comparable between the ESD and RFA groups. A considerably higher risk of esophageal stenosis was observed in patients with extensive lesions in the ESD group compared to the RFA group (60% vs. 31%; P < 0.05), and the rate of refractory stricture is also higher than that of the RFA.

conclusionBoth RFA and ESD are effective in treating large, flat, early ESCNs; however, ESD is more likely to cause side effects, such as esophageal stricture, particularly in lesions that are larger than 3/4 of the diameter. Before RFA, a more precise and thorough pretreatment examination should be performed. A more accurate pretreatment evaluation will be an important development direction for early esophageal cancer in future. After surgery, a strict routine review is crucial.