摘要
In a recently published letter to the editor, we debated the proposal by Coccolini et al to treat gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the esophagogastric junction with enucleation and, if indicated, adjuvant therapy. We highlighted that, because the prognostic impact of a T1 high-mitotic rate esophageal GIST is worse than that of a T1 high-mitotic rate gastric GIST, enucleation may not be adequate surgery for esophagogastric GISTs with a high mitotic rate. In rebuttal, Coccolini et al pointed out the possible bias in assessment of the mitotic rates due to the lack of standardized methods and underlined that the site and features of the tumor need to be carefully considered in evaluation of the risk-benefit balance. Here we confirm that, apart from the problematic issue of mitotic counting, enucleation should not be indicated for GISTs at any site to reduce the risk of tumor rupture, which has been recently considered to be an unfavorable prognostic factor, and to avoid microscopic residual tumor.
In a recently published letter to the editor, we debated the proposal by Coccolini et al to treat gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the esophagogastric junction with enucleation and, if indicated, adjuvant therapy. We highlighted that, because the prognostic impact of a T1 high-mitotic rate esophageal GIST is worse than that of a T1 high-mitotic rate gastric GIST, enucleation may not be adequate surgery for esophagogastric GISTs with a high mitotic rate. In rebuttal, Coccolini et al pointed out the possible bias in assessment of the mitotic rates due to the lack of standardized methods and underlined that the site and features of the tumor need to be carefully considered in evaluation of the risk-benefit balance. Here we confirm that, apart from the problematic issue of mitotic counting, enucleation should not be indicated for GISTs at any site to reduce the risk of tumor rupture, which has been recently considered to be an unfavorable prognostic factor, and to avoid microscopic residual tumor.
