Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Outcomes for Gastroesophageal Tumors in Low Volume Units: A Multicenter Survey

Background and Aims. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) outcomes have traditionally been reported from high volume centers in East Asia. Data from low volume centers in other parts of Asia remain sparse. Methods. A retrospective survey with a structured questionnaire of 5 tertiary centers in 3 countries in South East Asia was conducted. Details of training and clinical outcomes of ESD cases, with follow-up data from these centers, were analyzed. Results. Seven endoscopists from the 5 centers performed a total of 35 cases of ESD in the upper gastrointestinal tract (UGIT) over a 6-year duration. Details of the lesions excised were as follows: median size was 20 mm, morphologically 20 (68.6%) were flat/depressed and 6 (17.1%) were submucosal, and histologically 27 (77.1%) were neoplastic. The median duration of ESD procedures was 105 minutes, with an en-bloc resection rate of 91.4%. There was 1 (2.9%) case of delayed bleeding, but no perforation nor mortality in any of the cases. The recurrence rate after ESD was 5.7%. A prolonged ESD duration was influenced by a larger size of lesion (25 mm, ) but not by factors related to the training experience of endoscopists. Conclusions. ESD in the UGIT is feasible and safe in low volume centers in Asia

Evaluation of patient satisfaction of an outpatient gastroscopy service in an Asian tertiary care hospital

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are limited published studies on patient satisfaction towards endoscopy from Asian countries. Different methods of evaluation of patient satisfaction may yield different results and there is currently no study to compare results of on-site versus phone-back interviews.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>On-site followed by phone-back interviews were carried out on consecutive patients attending the outpatient gastroscopy service of University of Malaya Medical Centre between July 2010 and January 2011 using the modified Group Health Association of America-9 (mGHAA-9) questionnaire. The question on technical skill of endoscopist was replaced with a question on patient comfort during endoscopy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seven hundred patients were interviewed. Waiting times for appointment and on gastroscopy day, and discomfort during procedure accounted for over 90% of unfavorable responses. Favorable response diminished to undesirable level when waiting times for appointment and on gastroscopy day exceeded 1 month and 1 hour, respectively. Satisfaction scores were higher for waiting time for appointment but lower for personal manner of nurses/staff and explanation given during phone-back interview. There was no significant difference in satisfaction scores for other questions, including overall rating between the two methods.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Waiting times and discomfort during procedure were main causes for patient dissatisfaction. Phone-back interview may result in different scores for some items compared with on-site interview and should be taken into account when comparing results using the different methods.</p