Evaluation of the margins of differentiated early gastric cancer by using conventional endoscopy

Table 1 The characteristics of 364 lesions

Age (yr)
Median ± SD	70 ± 9
Range	30-92
Sex
Men (%)	293 (80.5)
Women (%)	71 (19.5)
Tumor location (three parts)
U (%)	74 (20.3)
M (%)	144 (39.6)
L (%)	146 (40.1)
Tumor location (cross-sectional parts)
Less (%)	140 (38.5)
Gre (%)	59 (16.2)
Ant (%)	64 (17.6)
Post (%)	101 (27.7)
Color
Reddish (%)	213 (58.5)
Discolored (%)	87 (23.9)
Normal color (%)	64 (17.6)
Margin of the lesion
Delineated	337 (92.6)
Undelineated	27 (7.4)
Main macroscopic type
0-I (%)	11 (3.0)
0-IIa (%)	154 (42.3)
0-IIb (%)	6 (1.6)
0-IIc (%)	193 (53.0)
Components of flat area (0-IIb)
Presence (%)	17 (4.7)
Absense (%)	347 (95.3)
Tumor size (mm)
Median ± SD	16 ± 13
Range	2-100
Ulceration finding
Presence (%)	62 (17.0)
Absense (%)	302 (83.0)
Components of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma in the mucosal surface
Presence (%)	26 (7.1)
Absense (%)	338 (92.9)
Metaplasia around the lesion
Presence (%)	337 (92.6)
Absense (%)	27 (7.4)
Marking
Right	302 (83.0)
Wrong	62 (17.0)

SD: Standard deviation; U: The upper third of the stomach; M: The middle third of the stomach; L: The lower third of the stomach; Less: The lesser curvature; Gre: The greater curvatures; Ant: The anterior wall; Post: The posterior wall.

Table 2 The comparison between "clear margin" and "unclear margin"

	Clear margin (n = 289)	Unclear margin (n = 75)
Age (yr)
Median ± SD	70 ± 8	72 ± 10	NS
Range	37-92	30-90
Sex
Men (%)	237 (82.0)	56 (74.7)	NS
Women (%)	52 (18.0)	19 (25.3)
Tumor location (three parts)
U (%)	54 (18.7)	20 (26.7)	P= 0.0128
M (%)	108 (37.4)	36 (48.0)
L (%)	127 (43.9)	19 (25.3)
Tumor location (cross-sectional parts)
Less (%)	113 (39.1)	27 (36.0)	NS
Gre (%)	47 (16.3)	12 (16.0)
Ant (%)	51 (17.6)	13 (17.3)
Post (%)	78 (27.0)	23 (30.7)
Color
Reddish (%)	165 (57.1)	48 (64.0)	P= 0.0049
Discolored (%)	79 (27.3)	8 (10.7)
Norm-colored (%)	45 (15.6)	19 (25.3)
Main macroscopic type
0-I (%)	10 (3.5)	1 (1.3)	NS
0-IIa (%)	120 (41.5)	34 (45.3)
0-IIb (%)	3 (1.0)	3 (4.0)
0-IIc (%)	156 (54.0)	37 (49.3)
Components of flat area (0-IIb)
Presence (%)	7 (2.4)	10 (13.3)	P= 0.0002
Absense (%)	282 (97.6)	65 (86.7)
Tumor size (mm)
Median ± SD	15 ± 11	25 ± 17	P< 0.0001
Range	2-68	3-100
Ulceration finding
Presence (%)	43 (14.9)	19 (25.3)	P= 0.0319
Absense (%)	246 (85.1)	56 (74.7)
Components of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma in the mucosal surface
Presence (%)	11 (3.8)	15 (20.0)	P< 0.0001
Absense (%)	278 (96.2)	60 (80.0)
Metaplasia around the lesion
Presence (%)	266 (92.0)	71 (94.7)	NS
Absense (%)	23 (8.0)	4 (5.3)

SD: Standard deviation; U: The upper third of the stomach; M: The middle third of the stomach; L: The lower third of the stomach; Less: The lesser curvature; Gre: The greater curvatures; Ant: The anterior wall; Post: The posterior wall; NS: Not significant.

Table 3 The multivariate regression analysis of the factors that make the determination of the margin difficult

Factors	OR	95%CI	P value
Lcation in the U and M parts	1.769	0.940-3.331	NS
Norm-colored	2.095	1.040-4.217	0.0383
Components of flat area (0-IIb)	4.900	1.610-14.913	0.0051
Tumor size ≥ 21 mm	3.852	2.165-6.852	< 0.0001
Ulceration finding	2.307	1.156-4.604	0.0178
Components of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma in the mucosal surface	6.65	2.590-17.073	< 0.0001

OR: Odds ratio; NS: Not significant; U: The upper third of the stomach; M: The middle third of the stomach.