Optimizing endoscopic detection of early gastric cancer: stratification and preventive strategies for Peri-ESD diagnostic oversights
Related Experiment Video For AG, atrophic gastritis
Updated: Feb 28, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors
Published on: February 16, 2024
Lei Zhang1, Nana An1, Xiuli Zheng1
1Department of Endoscopy, the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Background:
Peri-endoscopic submucosal dissection missed early gastric cancers (peri-ESD MEGCs), defined as ESD-indicated lesions overlooked during pre-ESD diagnostic workup or post-ESD surveillance, may arise from deficiencies at any procedural phase (preparation, observation, diagnosis, or sampling). To address this, we developed a temporal-procedural bidirectional assessment protocol specifically targeting peri-ESD MEGCs, aiming to optimize endoscopic quality and prevent diagnostic omissions.
Methods:
In this retrospective cohort study, 1,011 EGC lesions treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) between 2017 and 2024 were analyzed. The primary analysis defined the MEGC time window as 24 months. Peri-ESD MEGCs were stratified into two temporal phases, pre-ESD examination vs. post-ESD surveillance, and four etiological categories, inadequate preparation, inadequate observation, diagnosis error, and sampling error, for each endoscopic cause of MEGC. To assess the robustness of our findings, a sensitivity analysis was performed by redefining the MEGC time window as 12 months.
Results:
Among 94 peri-ESD MEGCs, pre-ESD MEGCs (n=52) predominantly demonstrated inadequate observation (51.9%), which was associated with greater curvature location (OR: 5.45; 95% CI: 1.76-16.91), nonuse of near-focus narrow-band imaging (NF-NBI, OR: 16.78; 95% CI: 5.50-51.26), and severe intestinal metaplasia (OR: 3.84; 95% CI: 1.09-13.52). Post-ESD MEGCs (n=42) predominantly demonstrated a diagnosis error (52.4%), correlated with trainees (OR: 3.53; 95% CI: 1.06-11.68), small lesions (<15 mm, OR: 3.83; 95% CI: 1.10-13.36), nonuse of NF-NBI (OR: 17.44; 95% CI: 4.81-63.17), and severe atrophic gastritis (OR: 7.78; 95% CI: 1.91-31.20). The sensitivity analysis using a 12-month MEGC time window yielded results consistent with the primary analysis, demonstrating the robustness of the identified risk factors for peri-ESD missed lesions.
Conclusions:
Optimizing peri-ESD gastroscopic observation (via NF-NBI) and post-ESD diagnostic accuracy (through operator training) could significantly reduce peri-ESD MEGCs, particularly those reflecting characteristics of ESD-eligible lesions.
Related Concept Videos
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
Barrett Esophagus-I: Introduction
This constant acid exposure transforms the esophagus's pink mucosal lining (stratified squamous epithelium) into a type of lining more...
Barrett Esophagus-II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
To diagnose Barrett's esophagus, healthcare providers often recommend an endoscopy for those showing symptoms of acid reflux. The procedure...
Esophageal Strictures-II: Clinical Features and Management
Healthcare providers should gather a comprehensive medical history and conduct a physical examination for diagnosis. If esophageal stricture is...
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease II: Clinical Features and Management
Clinical Manifestations
GERD presents itself in a multitude of ways, with symptoms varying from person to person. The hallmark symptoms are...

