Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology

15-03-2024 | Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor

The Diagnostic Approach of Benign Esophageal Tumors: A Narrative Review

Authors: Alex R. Jones, MD, Preksha Vankawala, MD, Tarek Sawas, MD, MPH

Published in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Benign esophageal tumors (BETs) pose diagnostic challenges due to overlapping clinical and imaging features, necessitating advancements in diagnostic techniques. Distinguishing between tumors with and without malignant potential is essential to guide management. We aim to review the diagnostic approach to BETs with an emphasis on recent advances.

Recent Findings

EUS-guided tissue acquisition is the current gold standard, particularly in subepithelial lesions (SELs). EUS with fine-needle biopsy (FNB) is considered superior to fine-needle aspiration (FNA), unless rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is available. The influence of needle size and suction technique has limited impact on the tissue sample quality. Mucosal-incision–assisted biopsy aims to improve diagnostic yield for smaller SELs and improve accessibility of diagnostic techniques. Recent studies assessing integration of artificial intelligence have shown promise in improving diagnostic accuracy.

Summary

Retrospective data shows promise for technologies intended to improve both non-invasive and invasive modalities for the diagnosis of BETs. Future research should aim to prospectively explore these strategies and include lesions throughout the gastrointestinal tract.
Literature
1.
Ha C, Regan J, Cetindag IB, Ali A, Mellinger JD. Benign esophageal tumors. Surg Clin North Am. 2015;95(3):491–514.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Rice TW. Benign esophageal tumors: Esophagoscopy and endoscopic esophageal ultrasound. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;15(1):20–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Menon L, Buscaglia JM. Endoscopic approach to subepithelial lesions. Ther Adv Gastroenterol. 2014;7(3):123–30.CrossRef
4.
•• Jacobson BC, Bhatt A, Greer KB, Lee LS, Park WG, Sauer BG, et al. ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2023;118(1):46–58. American College of Gastroenterology clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal SELs with review of pertinent literature corresponding to recommendations.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Sharzehi K, Sethi A, Savides T. AGA clinical practice update on management of subepithelial lesions encountered during routine endoscopy: expert review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;20(11):2435-2443.e4.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Polkowski M, Larghi A, Weynand B, Boustière C, Giovannini M, Pujol B, et al. Learning, techniques, and complications of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) technical guideline. Endoscopy. 2012;44(02):190–206.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Faulx AL, Kothari S, Acosta RD, Agrawal D, Bruining DH, Chandrasekhara V, et al. The role of endoscopy in subepithelial lesions of the GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(6):1117–32.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Hwang JH, Saunders MD, Rulyak SJ, Shaw S, Nietsch H, Kimmey MB. A prospective study comparing endoscopy and EUS in the evaluation of GI subepithelial masses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62(2):202–8.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Alkhatib AA, Faigel DO. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided diagnosis of subepithelial tumors. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2012;22(2):187–205.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Khan S, Zhang R, Fang W, Wang T, Li S, Wang D, et al. Reliability of endoscopic ultrasound using miniprobes and grayscale histogram analysis in diagnosing upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2020;2020:1–9.CrossRef
11.
Yamashita Y, Yoshikawa T, Kawaji Y, Tamura T, Hatamaru K, Itonaga M, et al. Novel endoscopic ultrasonography imaging technique for visualizing microcirculation without contrast enhancement in subepithelial lesions: prospective study. Dig Endosc. 2021;33:955–61.PubMed
12.
• Yamashita Y, Ashida R, Yamazaki H, Kawaji Y, Shimokawa T, Tamura T, et al. Comparison of 22G fork-tip and Franseen needles and usefulness of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Diagnostics. 2022;12(12):3122. Retrospective observational study assessing the utility of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS for evaluation of gastrointestinal SELs. Results indicate the contrast-enhanced EUS could differentiate GIST and non-GIST and could be particularly useful for lesions <2 cm.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
• Liu XY, Song W, Mao T, Zhang Q, Zhang C, Li XY. Application of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions using endoscopic ultrasonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2022;12:915481. Systematic review and meta-analysis including eight studies demonstrating excellent diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence interpretation of EUS for evaluation of gastrointestinal SELs.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Ye XH, Zhao LL, Wang L. Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound with artificial intelligence for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a meta-analysis. J Dig Dis. 2022;23(5–6):253–61.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Minoda Y, Ihara E, Fujimori N, Nagatomo S, Esaki M, Hata Y, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound endoscopy with artificial intelligence for the differential diagnosis of non-gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):16640.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
• Khalaf K, Terrin M, Jovani M, Rizkala T, Spadaccini M, Pawlak KM, et al. A comprehensive guide to artificial intelligence in endoscopic ultrasound. J Clin Med. 2023;12(11):3757.Review article highlighting the clinical utility of using AI models for interpretation of EUS images for assessment of gastrointestinal SELs.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Koutsoumpas A, Perera R, Melton A, Kuker J, Ghosh T, Braden B. Tunneled biopsy is an underutilised, simple, safe and efficient method for tissue acquisition from subepithelial tumours. World J Clin Cases. 2021;9(21):5822–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Buscaglia JM, Nagula S, Jayaraman V, Robbins DH, Vadada D, Gross SA, et al. Diagnostic yield and safety of jumbo biopsy forceps in patients with subepithelial lesions of the upper and lower GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(6):1147–52.PubMedCrossRef
19.
• Collins K, Yocum BP, Mesa H, Cramer H, Saeed O. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology versus endoscopic biopsy for the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract: a 10-year retrospective single institution analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2023;51(7):434–40. Retrospective study with 10 years of data indicating that EUS-FNA is superior to standard forceps biopsy for diagnosis of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Attila T, Aydin Ö. Lesion size determines diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA with onsite cytopathologic evaluation for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2018;29(4):436–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
•• Facciorusso A, Sunny SP, Del Prete V, Antonino M, Muscatiello N. Comparison between fine-needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration for EUS-guided sampling of subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(1):14-22.e2. Meta-analysis including 10 studies comparing EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB. Demonstrated overall superiority of EUS-FNB to EUS-FNA, but non-inferiority of EUS-FNA when ROSE was available.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Takasumi M, Hikichi T, Hashimoto M, Nakamura J, Kato T, Kikuchi H, et al. A pilot randomized crossover trial of wet suction and conventional techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Pilone V, editor. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2021;4913107.
23.
Lee JS, Cho CM, Kwon YH, Seo AN, Bae HI, Han MH. Comparison of diagnostic performances of slow-pull suction and standard suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors. Clin Endosc. 2022;55(5):637–44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Moisini I, Amin K, Mallery S, Stewart J, Mettler T. Efficacy of endoscopic-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal spindle cell tumors. Diagn Cytopathol. 2018;46(8):663–9.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Lee CK, Chung IK, Lee SH, Lee SH, Lee TH, Park SH, et al. Endoscopic partial resection with the unroofing technique for reliable tissue diagnosis of upper GI subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria on EUS (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71(1):188–94.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Binmoeller KF, Shah JN, Bhat YM, Kane SD. Suck-ligate-unroof-biopsy by using a detachable 20-mm loop for the diagnosis and therapy of small subepithelial tumors (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79(5):750–5.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Sanaei O, Fernández-Esparrach G, De La Serna-Higuera C, Carrara S, Kumbhari V, El Zein MH, et al. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine needle biopsy versus single-incision with needle knife for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a randomized controlled trial. Endosc Int Open. 2020;08(03):E266–73.CrossRef
28.
•• Giri S, Afzalpurkar S, Angadi S, Sundaram S. Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Endosc. 2022;55(5):615–25. Systematic review and meta-analysis including seven studies assessing the use of MIAB for diagnosis of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Indicated that performance of MIAB was comparable to EUS-guided tissue acquisition and performance may be superior for lesions <2 cm.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Iwamuro M, Tanaka T, Kanzaki H, Kawano S, Kawahara Y, Okada H. Esophageal granular cell tumors can be differentiated from leiomyomas using endoscopic ultrasonography. Intern Med. 2018;57(11):1509–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Sun LJ, Chen X, Dai YN, Xu CF, Ji F, Chen LH, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and treatment strategy choice of esophageal leiomyoma. Clinics. 2017;72(4):197–201.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Taşkın OÇ, Armutlu A, Adsay V, Aslan F, Kapran Y. Clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical characteristics of upper gastrointestinal leiomyomas harboring interstitial cells of Cajal: a potential mimicker of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020;45:151476.PubMedCrossRef
32.
• Wu CE, Tzen CY, Wang SY, Yeh CN. Clinical diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST): from the molecular genetic point of view. Cancers. 2019;11(5):679. Summary and suggested algorithm for diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors using immunohistochemistry and genetic testing.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
Novelli M, Rossi S, Rodriguez-Justo M, Taniere P, Seddon B, Toffolatti L, et al. DOG1 and CD117 are the antibodies of choice in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Histopathology. 2010;57(2):259–70.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Jiao J, Fan X, Luo L, Zhao W, Zheng Z, Chen X, et al. Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic resection for esophageal schwannoma. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2023;58(8):963–9.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Hou YY, Tan YS, Xu JF, Wang XN, Lu SH, Ji Y, et al. Schwannoma of the gastrointestinal tract: a clinicopathological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study of 33 cases. Histopathology. 2006;48(5):536–45.PubMedCrossRef
36.
37.
Rasalkar DD, Chiu PWY, Teoh AYB, Chu WCW. Oesophageal haemangioma: imaging characteristics of this rare condition. Hong Kong Med J Xianggang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2010;16(3):230–1.PubMed
38.
Chen YY, Lin CM, Chen YF. Endoscopic and radiologic appearance of giant esophageal hemangioma. Endoscopy. 2015;47(S01):E45-6.PubMed
39.
Arizono E, Tajima Y, Yoshimura M, Saito K, Itoi T. Giant esophageal hemangioma diagnosed by 99mTc-HSA-D scintigraphy following equivocal CT, MRI, and endoscopy. Radiol Case Rep. 2021;16(5):1023–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Ryu DG, Kim SJ, Choi CW, Hwang CS, Kim HW, Park SB, et al. Combination conventional endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound can differentiate between esophageal granular cell tumors and leiomyomas. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(45):e31435.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Shi Y, Chai N, Zhong L, Li L, Zou J, Xiang J, et al. Experience with esophageal granular cell tumors: clinical and endoscopic analysis of 22 cases. Dig Dis Sci. 2021;66(4):1233–9.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Goenka AH, Sharma S, Ramachandran V, Chattopadhyay TK, Ray R. Giant fibrovascular polyp of the esophagus: report of a case. Surg Today. 2011;41(1):120–4.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Pinto A, Abastado B, Cattan P. An esophageal tumor unlike others: the fibrovascular polyp. J Visc Surg. 2019;156(3):271–3.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Kim M, Chae KJ, Kim JH, Han YH. Giant fibrovascular polyp mimicking esophageal malignancy on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2023;48(12):1091–2.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Graham RP, Yasir S, Fritchie KJ, Reid MD, Greipp PT, Folpe AL. Polypoid fibroadipose tumors of the esophagus: “giant fibrovascular polyp” or liposarcoma? A clinicopathological and molecular cytogenetic study of 13 cases. Mod Pathol. 2018;31(2):337–42.PubMedCrossRef
46.
47.
Birkness-Gartman JE, Wangsiricharoen S, Lazar AJ, Gross JM. Oesophageal glomus tumours: rare neoplasms with aggressive clinical behaviour. Histopathology. 2023;82(7):1048–55.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Modi C, Shah A, Depasquale JR, Shah N, Spira RS. A large prolapsed inflammatory fibroid polyp of the esophagus: an unusual presentation. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;9(5):322–5.
49.
Yamamoto M, Nishida T, Nakamatsu D, Adachi S, Inada M. Endoscopic findings of esophageal gland duct adenoma resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92(4):961–2.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Nie L, Wu HY, Shen YH, Fan XS, Sun Q, Huang Q, et al. Esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma: a clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study with a review of the literature: esophageal submucosal gland duct adenoma. Dis Esophagus. 2016;29(8):1048–53.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Wong MW, Bair MJ, Shih SC, Chu CH, Wang HY, Wang TE, et al. Using typical endoscopic features to diagnose esophageal squamous papilloma. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(7):2349–56.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Iwamuro M, Okamoto Y, Kawano S, Okada H. Esophageal papilloma detected by positron emission tomography. Intern Med. 2020;59(7):1003–4.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Diagnostic Approach of Benign Esophageal Tumors: A Narrative Review
Authors
Alex R. Jones, MD
Preksha Vankawala, MD
Tarek Sawas, MD, MPH
Publication date
15-03-2024
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology
Print ISSN: 1092-8472
Electronic ISSN: 1534-309X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-024-00443-7
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits