Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

Search
Advanced Search
OPEN ACCESS
mobile search button mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Clin Endosc > Volume 52(4); 2019 > Article
Review Assessment of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy according to the Kimura-Takemoto Classification and Its Potential Application in Daily Practice
Duc Trong Quach1,2orcid, Toru Hiyama3
Clinical Endoscopy 2019;52(4):321-327.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2019.072
Published online: July 22, 2019

1Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

2Department of Gastroenterology, Gia- Dinh People’s Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

3Service Center, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan

Correspondence: Duc Trong Quach Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, 217 Hong Bang Street, District 5, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam Tel: +84-8-3855-4269, Fax: +84-8-3950-6126, E-mail: drquachtd@ump.edu.vn
• Received: March 22, 2019   • Revised: May 3, 2019   • Accepted: May 4, 2019

Copyright © 2019 Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 14,398 Views
  • 602 Download
  • 40 Web of Science
  • 40 Crossref
  • 37 Scopus
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • The assessment of endoscopic gastric atrophy (EGA) according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification has been reported to correlate well with histological assessment. Although agreement among beginner endoscopists was less than that among experienced endoscopists, it has been shown that agreement level could markedly improve and remained stable after proper training. Several cohort studies have consistently shown that the severity of EGA at baseline is significantly associated with the presence of advanced precancerous gastric lesions and gastric cancer, as well as the development of gastric cancer in future. Patients with moderate-to-severe EGA still have high risk of gastric cancer even after successful Helicobacter pylori eradication and should be candidates for gastric cancer surveillance. The assessment of EGA, therefore, could be used as a preliminary tool to identify individuals at high risk for gastric cancer. In this paper, we review the agreement on mucosal atrophy assessment between the Kimura-Takemoto classification and histology as well as the potential application of this endoscopic classification to identify precancerous gastric lesions and gastric cancer in daily practice.
  • Keywords: Gastric cancer; Endoscopy; Helicobacter pylori; Surveillance; Screening
Gastric atrophy is considered a precancerous condition, mainly caused by Helicobacter pylori infection. The condition may progress through several precancerous stages and lead to gastric cancer (GC) [1]. The extent as well as the severity of gastric atrophy have been shown to be associated with the risk of developing GC [2-5]. Therefore, these characteristics could help to identify high-risk individuals for GC screening and surveillance.
Although the gold standard for gastric atrophy diagnosis is histology, Kimura and Takemoto have reported that gastric atrophy changes could be endoscopically identify with high confidence since the 1960s [6]. The Kimura-Takemoto endoscopic classification has been widely used in some Eastern countries. During the last 50 years, the histological definition of gastric atrophy has significantly changed to achieve better diagnostic agreement and provide useful information about GC risk [7-9]. Recent advances in histological assessment of gastric atrophy have shown good agreement with the Kimura-Takemoto classification [10-12].
In daily practice, there is definite benefit in comparing endoscopic and histological findings. This approach provides real-time information regarding the risk of GC, so that endoscopists can focus more on GC screening, in addition to looking for lesions that explain a patient’s symptoms. This issue is extremely important as early GC detection may be very challenging. In this paper, we will review the agreement on mucosal atrophy assessment between the Kimura-Takemoto classification and histology, as well as the potential application of this endoscopic classification to identify precancerous gastric lesions and GC in daily practice.
Endoscopic atrophic border
The key to assessment of endoscopic gastric atrophy (EGA) according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification is to identify the location of the so-called endoscopic atrophic border in the stomach (Fig. 1). In 1966, Takemoto described for the first time the appearance of an “atrophic transitional zone” in patients with gastritis, subsequently known as the endoscopic atrophic border [6]. This border can be recognized by discriminating mucosal differences between the 2 sides: the gastric mucosa has a lower level and is pale in color on 1 side, while it has a higher level and is homogeneously reddish on the other side. In order to clearly recognize the atrophic border, the end of the scope should be kept 5–10 cm from the gastric wall [13].
Endoscopic gastric pattern according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification
Based on location of the endoscopic atrophic border, Kimura and Takemoto proposed an endoscopic classification of gastric atrophy consisting of 2 main types: closed type (C type) and open type (O type) [13]. These 2 main types are further subdivided into 3 C- types (C-1, C-2 and C-3) and 3 O-types (O-1, O-2 and O-3) (Fig. 2). The closed type C-1 is a pattern in which endoscopic atrophic findings are not visible in the corpus but only in the antrum. In type C-2 and C-3, the atrophic border starts from the greater curvature of the antrum, coming up to the anterior wall, crossing the lesser curvature, and thus making an almost symmetric enclosure. Therefore, the atrophic findings are recognized parabolically above the angulus. The differentiation between types C-2 and C-3 is based on the location of the atrophic border in relation to the middle of the stomach on the lesser curvature: the atrophic border lies below this level in type C-2 and above it in type C-3. In open types, the endoscopic atrophic area is widely spread; the atrophic border no longer lies on the lesser curvature, but instead between the lesser curvature and anterior wall in type O-1, on the anterior wall in type O-2, and between the anterior wall and greater curvature in type O-3.
Severity of gastric atrophy graded according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification and correlation with histology
The severity of EGA is often classified into 3 grades: mild (C-1, C-2), moderate (C-3, O-1), and severe (O-2, O-3). The strength of agreement between EGA and histological atrophy according to the updated Sydney classification system was good, with a weighted kappa value of 0.51; this was not worse than the interobserver histological agreement between 2 pathologists [10]. A recent study was conducted in patients in the UK to investigate the correlation between EGA and histological atrophy in Western patients [12]. The strength of agreement on the extent of atrophy between EGA and histological atrophy showed good reproducibility, with a weighted kappa value of 0.76.
Recent advances in the histological definition and assessment of gastric atrophy have shed further light on the histological background of the Kimura-Takemoto classification. Traditionally, atrophy of the gastric mucosa was defined as the loss of glands [9]. As pathologists still had considerable difficulty in reaching agreement on the nature, presence, and grading according to this definition [14], gastric atrophy was redefined as the loss of appropriate glands, comprised of 2 main morphological types: metaplastic and non-metaplastic [15]. Consequently, a high level of agreement was achieved by gastrointestinal pathologists trained in different cultural contexts [8]. Applying this definition of atrophy, a study was conducted to describe the topography of gastric atrophy in patients with early intestinal type GC, and found that atrophy in the corpus was present as a continuous sheet of pseudo-pyloric metaplasia and formed an advancing atrophic front [16]. The presence of a histologically atrophic front is, therefore, similar to the spread of antral mucosa towards the corpus and is faster in the lesser curvature; this pattern is identical to that of atrophic extension endoscopically described by Kimura and Takemoto.
The Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment (OLGA) staging system was recently proposed to provide information regarding GC risk [15]. Observational studies in populations with different risk levels for GC have shown that precancerous and neoplastic gastric lesions clustered in high OLGA stages (i.e., stage III and IV) [2,3,11]. Recently, large prospective studies have confirmed that OLGA staging reliably predicts the risk for development of GC [4,5]. Our previous study showed that the severity of EGA was significantly correlated with that of OLGA stage in Vietnamese patients with dyspepsia [11]. All patients with high OLGA stages had moderate-to-severe EGA. Using moderate-to-severe EGA as the diagnostic criterion for high OLGA stage, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 100%, 57.7%, 10.3%, and 100%, respectively.
Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for gastric mucosal atrophy assessment according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification
Good to excellent intraobserver agreement and moderate interobserver agreement among endoscopists with ≥7 years of experience have been reported. However, the intraobserver and interobserver agreement among beginner endoscopists (≤3 years of experience) was lower and ranged wider than that in experienced endoscopists [17]. Recently, a prospective study was conducted in Korea to evaluate the effect of training on interobserver agreement in diagnosis and grading of EGA according to the level of an endoscopist’s experience [18]. Six less-experienced (≤10 years of experience) and 6 experienced endoscopists (≥10 years) participated in the study. The training session consisted of 4 interventions with 2-week intervals, and 2 follow-up assessments without feedback. This study showed that interobserver agreement for diagnosis and grading of EGA improved after training and remained stable after intervention, irrespective of experience level.
Progression of gastric atrophy assessed with the Kimura-Takemoto classification
Few studies have investigated progression of gastric atrophy using the Kimura-Takemoto classification before and after eradication.
A 10-year, prospective follow-up study was performed in Japan to assess the natural progression of EGA. Annual upper gastrointestinal endoscopy found that all patients without H. pylori infection had no endoscopic or histological change. In contrast, 43% of patients with H. pylori infection exhibited a cephalad shift of the endoscopic atrophic border. Progression of histological atrophy and intestinal metaplasia (IM) was observed in 46% and 49% of these patients, respectively [19].
Another study in Japan was conducted to assess the relationship of EGA with histological atrophy and IM before and after H. pylori eradication [20]. Endoscopic findings were reported at approximately 78 months after eradication. Compared with the grades assigned before eradication, an improvement in endoscopic grade was observed in 40.1% of patients, while no change or exacerbation of atrophy was observed in 33.9% and 25.2% of patients following successful eradication, respectively. There was a significant correlation of EGA with histological atrophy and IM, but not with antral atrophy after eradication. The histological atrophy scores showed significant improvement after eradication, while IM showed no significant change. The findings of this study were very important as they implied that the risk of GC development could not be eliminated if baseline IM was present, even in patients with improved EGA after H. pylori eradication.
Moderate-to-severe EGA as an endoscopic indicator for the presence of gastric cancer
Although chromoendoscopy and image-enhanced endoscopy can improve the detection of subtle gastric lesions [21], endoscopic examination generally starts with white-light endoscopy. This is a very important step because pre-endoscopic screening is sometimes insufficient and the stomach may need further cleaning. Moderate-to-severe EGA observed during the procedure indicates that patients are at high-risk of GC and endoscopic examination should be performed very carefully. The relationship between GC lesions and an atrophic border helps endoscopists to focus on the locations where GC is more likely to occur. At least 2 studies have reported this interesting finding. One study reported that about 85% of GCs (including 93% of intestinal type) occurred on the distal side of the atrophic border [22]. Early diffuse-type GCs arose closer to the atrophic border than intestinal-type GCs and were more likely to be located proximal to the border. The mean distance between cancer and the atrophic border in intestinal- and diffuse-type GCs was 2.40 and 1.45 cm, respectively. Another study found that 98.4% of early GCs after H. pylori eradication were located within the endoscopically atrophic mucosa or along the atrophic border [23]. Synchronous GC is also a concern for endoscopists as its incidence is about 6.8% to 8.1% after endoscopic resection of early GCs [24,25]. It is important to identify patients who are more likely to have synchronous GC at the time the primary GC is detected. A recent study on patients with synchronous multiple GCs found that 96.7% had baseline open-type (i.e., type O-1, O-2, and O-3) gastric atrophy [26]. As EGA can be assessed using white-light endoscopy, this finding is widely applicable, especially in areas with limited resources (Fig. 3). A recent global consensus on gastritis recommends that assessment for EGA can be used initially in areas with proven expertise in endoscopic scoring, although histological confirmation is still recommended [27].
Moderate-to-severe EGA as an indicator for high risk of GC development
As successful eradication of H. pylori could not eliminate the risk of GC [28-34], it is important to identify high-risk individuals who still need surveillance after eradication. Several studies have consistently confirmed that the severity of EGA at baseline is associated with not only the current presence of GC but also the risk for GC development (Table 1) [26,29-31,33-39].
The presence of moderate-to-severe EGA at baseline consistently indicates a high risk of GC development. However, recent cohort studies with long-term follow-up reported that GCs may still occur in patients with none/mild EGA [31,37], but with a much lower proportion compared to patients with moderate-to-severe EGA. GCs in these patients commonly occurred very late, usually after 4–5 years, and up to more than 10 years after eradication [31,40]. Considering the different carcinogenesis pathways in intestinal-type GC and diffuse-type GC, one would presume that EGA severity is a better indicator of the former than the latter. Indeed, a long-term cohort study reported that the frequency of severe atrophy was significantly higher in patients with intestinal-type GC than in those with diffuse-type GC who did not undergo H. pylori eradication [38]. However, 10 of 13 patients with diffuse-type GC in this study had baseline moderate-to-severe EGA. Furthermore, several cohort studies in patients who had undergone H. pylori eradication consistently found very few GCs, including diffuse-type GCs, in patients with baseline none/mild EGA [26,31,37]. Therefore, moderate-to-severe EGA is a good indicator for the development of intestinal-type GC as well as diffuse-type GC.
After endoscopic resection or surgery for GC, patients are still at high risk and should undergo surveillance for metachronous lesions. H. pylori eradication is helpful to reduce the incidence of metachronous GC in these patients [41]. However, eradication therapy can make the detection of metachronous GC very challenging, as post-eradication GC lesions often have a depressed-type and gastritis-like appearance [32]. Some studies have reported that moderate-to-severe EGA is a risk factor for metachronous GC (Table 2) [26,42,43]. Therefore, endoscopists should also carefully search for subtle suspicious lesions in patients with this endoscopic finding.
Most published studies on a surveillance strategy for patients with moderate-to-severe EGA offered patients an annual or biannual endoscopic screening interval [31,37,39]. However, as we previously reported that the distribution of high-stage OLGA gastritis was not homogeneous among patients with the endoscopic finding of extensive and incomplete IM [44], histological examination may be useful to further stratify the risk levels of GC for determination of more appropriate surveillance intervals. This is an important and interesting question for future research.
In summary, grading EGA according to the Kimura-Takemoto classification has been reported to correlate well with histological assessment according to the updated Sydney system and the OLGA system. Several cohort studies have consistently shown that moderate-to-severe EGA at baseline is significantly associated with the presence of advanced precancerous gastric lesions and GC, as well as the development of GC. Although agreement among beginner endoscopists was lower than that among experienced endoscopists, it has been shown that agreement could markedly improve and remain stable after training. The Kimura-Takemoto classification, therefore, could be widely used in daily practice as a preliminary tool to identify individuals at high risk for GC.
Fig. 1.
Atrophic border on the greater curvature (A) and lesser curvature (B). The gastric mucosa shows differences in level and color between the 2 sides of the atrophic border. The endoscopic atrophic border represents both the transition from non-atrophic gastric mucosa to atrophic gastric mucosa and the transition from fundic glands to pyloric glands in a non-atrophic stomach [6]. Its presence, however, does not always mean that a patient has gastric mucosal atrophy. The term “atrophic border” is not accurate and might cause some misunderstanding, but is still used in daily practice due to its historical meaning.
ce-2019-072f1.jpg
Fig. 2.
Extension of the atrophic border (red line) and patterns of endoscopic gastric atrophy as classified by Kimura and Takemoto [13].
ce-2019-072f2.jpg
Fig. 3.
A 24-year-old Vietnamese female underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for epigastric pain. The patient had no alarming features. (A, B) White-light endoscopy clearly demonstrated moderate endoscopic gastric atrophy (type O-1), even with an older-generation gastroscope (Olympus EXERA-GIF 160 Video Gastroscope; Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan), which prompted the endoscopist to search carefully for gastric cancer. (C) An easily-missed subtle change (yellow box) could be identified on the greater curvature of the corpus. (D) The gastroscope was advanced closer to the suspicious area and more air was insufflated. A small 0-IIc lesion hidden beneath gastric mucosal folds was identified. This lesion was diagnosed as undifferentiated adenocarcinoma on pathology.
ce-2019-072f3.jpg
Table 1.
The Severity of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy at Baseline as a Risk Factor of Gastric Cancer Development
Study Type of study Number of patients H. pylori status Follow-up period (yr) Number of cancer EGA severity as risk factor Other risk factors
Uemura et al. [38] Prospective cohort study 1,526 Before eradication 7.8 36 Severe (O-2, O-3) Corpus-predominant gastritis
Intestinal metaplasia
Kaji et al. [29] Retrospective cohort study 12,941 N/A 3.6 63 Open type > C-2, C-3 > C-1, C-0 Age ≥62
Presence of ulcer
Uric acid level
Hosokawa et al. [39] Retrospective cohort study 3,672 N/A 1.9 32 Severe (O2, O3) Age (60–69)
Masuyama et al. [26] Cross-sectional 27,777 N/A 13 407 C-2 or more severe
Sekikawa et al. [35] Retrospective cohort study 1,823 N/A 8.0 29 Open type Gastric xanthelasma
Sugimoto et al. [36] Cross-sectional 1,200 N/A 4.6 79 Severe (O-2, O-3) Intestinal metaplasia
Take et al. [30] Prospective cohort study 1,674 Post successful eradication 14.1 28 Open type, C-3
Toyoshima et al. [31] Retrospective cohort study 1,232 Post successful eradication 2.5 15 Open type > C-2, C-3 -
Shichijo et al. [37] Retrospective cohort study 573 Post successful eradication 6.2 21 Open type > C-2, C-3 > C-1, C-0 Intestinal metaplasia
Sakitani et al. [33] Retrospective cohort study 965 Post successful eradication 4.5 21 O-2, O-3 -
Kodama et al. [34] Retrospective cohort study 2,355 Post successful eradication 2.4 33 C-3 or more severe Intestinal metaplasia

EGA, endoscopic gastric atrophy; N/A, not applicable.

Table 2.
The Severity of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy at Baseline as a Risk Factor of Synchronous and Metachronous Gastric Cancer
Study Type of study Number of patients Patients’ characteristics Duration of study (yr) Type and number of patients with gastric neoplasm EGA severity as a high-risk factor Other high-risk factors
Mori et al. [42] Retrospective cohort study 594 After EMR/ESD 4.5 79 (MGC) Severe (O-2/O-3) Male
Successful H. pylori eradication Number of GC before successful H. pylori eradication
Masuyama et al. [26] Cross-sectional 272 N/A 13.0 30 (SGC) Open type -
20 (MGC)
Nam et al. [43] Retrospective cohort study 488 After ESD / Surgery 3.1 18 (MGC) C-3 or more severe Age ≥65
7 (MHD) elevated morphology of primary lesions
52 (MLD)

Synchronous gastric cancer (SGC), synchronous high-grade dysplasia and synchronous low-grade dysplasia were defined as gastric epithelial neoplastic lesions that have already been detected before the initial endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or found endoscopically and confirmed pathologically with endoscopic forceps biopsy within 1 year of ESD. Metachronous gastric cancer (MGC) was defined as a new GC detected at least 1 year after successful H. pylori eradication and located in an area other than the site of the previous endoscopic resection.

EGA, endoscopic gastric atrophy; EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection; MHD, metachronous high-grade dysplasia; MLD, metachronous low-grade dysplasia; N/A, no applicable.

  • 1. Correa P. Helicobacter pylori and gastric carcinogenesis. Am J Surg Pathol 1995;19 Suppl 1:S37–S43.PubMed
  • 2. Rugge M, Meggio A, Pennelli G, et al. Gastritis staging in clinical practice: the OLGA staging system. Gut 2007;56:631–636.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 3. Satoh K, Osawa H, Yoshizawa M, et al. Assessment of atrophic gastritis using the OLGA system. Helicobacter 2008;13:225–229.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Rugge M, Genta RM, Fassan M, et al. OLGA gastritis staging for the prediction of gastric cancer risk: a long-term follow-up study of 7436 patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2018;113:1621–1628.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 5. Rugge M, Meggio A, Pravadelli C, et al. Gastritis staging in the endoscopic follow-up for the secondary prevention of gastric cancer: a 5-year prospective study of 1755 patients. Gut 2019;68:11–17.ArticlePubMed
  • 6. Kimura K, Takemoto T. An endoscopic recognition of the atrophic border and its significance in chronic gastritis. Endoscopy 1969;1:87–97.ArticlePDF
  • 7. Dixon MF, Genta RM, Yardley JH, Correa P. Classification and grading of gastritis. The updated Sydney System. International Workshop on the Histopathology of Gastritis, Houston 1994. Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20:1161–1181.ArticlePubMed
  • 8. Rugge M, Correa P, Dixon MF, et al. Gastric mucosal atrophy: interobserver consistency using new criteria for classification and grading. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2002;16:1249–1259.ArticlePubMed
  • 9. Correa P. Chronic gastritis: a clinico-pathological classification. Am J Gastroenterol 1988;83:504–509.PubMed
  • 10. Liu Y, Uemura N, Xiao SD, Tytgat GN, Kate FJ. Agreement between endoscopic and histological gastric atrophy scores. J Gastroenterol 2005;40:123–127.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 11. Quach DT, Le HM, Nguyen OT, Nguyen TS, Uemura N. The severity of endoscopic gastric atrophy could help to predict operative link on gastritis assessment gastritis stage. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;26:281–285.ArticlePubMed
  • 12. Kono S, Gotoda T, Yoshida S, et al. Can endoscopic atrophy predict histological atrophy? Historical study in United Kingdom and Japan. World J Gastroenterol 2015;21:13113–13123.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 13. Kimura K, Satoh K, Ido K, Taniguchi Y, Takimoto T, Takemoto T. Gastritis in the Japanese stomach. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1996;214:17–20; discussion 21-13.ArticlePubMed
  • 14. Andrew A, Wyatt JI, Dixon MF. Observer variation in the assessment of chronic gastritis according to the Sydney system. Histopathology 1994;25:317–322.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Rugge M, Genta RM. Staging gastritis: an international proposal. Gastroenterology 2005;129:1807–1808.ArticlePubMed
  • 16. El-Zimaity HM, Ota H, Graham DY, Akamatsu T, Katsuyama T. Patterns of gastric atrophy in intestinal type gastric carcinoma. Cancer 2002;94:1428–1436.ArticlePubMed
  • 17. Miwata T, Quach DT, Hiyama T, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for gastric mucosa atrophy. BMC Gastroenterol 2015;15:95.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 18. Jin EH, Chung SJ, Lim JH, et al. Training effect on the inter-observer agreement in endoscopic diagnosis and grading of atrophic gastritis according to level of endoscopic experience. J Korean Med Sci 2018;33:e117.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 19. Sakaki N, Kozawa H, Egawa N, Tu Y, Sanaka M. Ten-year prospective follow-up study on the relationship between Helicobacter pylori infection and progression of atrophic gastritis, particularly assessed by endoscopic findings. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2002;16 Suppl 2:198–203.ArticlePubMed
  • 20. Kodama M, Okimoto T, Ogawa R, Mizukami K, Murakami K. Endoscopic atrophic classification before and after H. pylori eradication is closely associated with histological atrophy and intestinal metaplasia. Endosc Int Open 2015;3:E311–E317.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 21. Chiu PWY, Uedo N, Singh R, et al. An Asian consensus on standards of diagnostic upper endoscopy for neoplasia. Gut 2019;68:186–197.ArticlePubMed
  • 22. Yoshimura T, Shimoyama T, Fukuda S, Tanaka M, Axon AT, Munakata A. Most gastric cancer occurs on the distal side of the endoscopic atrophic border. Scand J Gastroenterol 1999;34:1077–1081.ArticlePubMed
  • 23. Tahara T, Shibata T, Horiguchi N, et al. A possible link between gastric mucosal atrophy and gastric cancer after Helicobacter pylori eradication. PLoS One 2016;11:e0163700.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 24. Nishida T, Tsujii M, Kato M, et al. Endoscopic surveillance strategy after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer. World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol 2014;5:100–106.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 25. Lee HJ, Lee YJ, Lee JY, et al. Characteristics of synchronous and metachronous multiple gastric tumors after endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric neoplasm. Clin Endosc 2018;51:266–273.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 26. Masuyama H, Yoshitake N, Sasai T, et al. Relationship between the degree of endoscopic atrophy of the gastric mucosa and carcinogenic risk. Digestion 2015;91:30–36.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 27. Sugano K, Tack J, Kuipers EJ, et al. Kyoto global consensus report on Helicobacter pylori gastritis. Gut 2015;64:1353–1367.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 28. Chen HN, Wang Z, Li X, Zhou ZG. Helicobacter pylori eradication cannot reduce the risk of gastric cancer in patients with intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia: evidence from a meta-analysis. Gastric Cancer 2016;19:166–175.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 29. Kaji K, Hashiba A, Uotani C, et al. Grading of atrophic gastritis is useful for risk stratification in endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2019;114:71–79.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 30. Take S, Mizuno M, Ishiki K, et al. The long-term risk of gastric cancer after the successful eradication of Helicobacter pylori. J Gastroenterol 2011;46:318–324.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 31. Toyoshima O, Yamaji Y, Yoshida S, et al. Endoscopic gastric atrophy is strongly associated with gastric cancer development after Helicobacter pylori eradication. Surg Endosc 2017;31:2140–2148.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 32. Shichijo S, Hirata Y. Characteristics and predictors of gastric cancer after Helicobacter pylori eradication. World J Gastroenterol 2018;24:2163–2172.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 33. Sakitani K, Hirata Y, Suzuki N, et al. Gastric cancer diagnosed after Helicobacter pylori eradication in diabetes mellitus patients. BMC Gastroenterol 2015;15:143.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 34. Kodama M, Murakami K, Okimoto T, et al. Histological characteristics of gastric mucosa prior to Helicobacter pylori eradication may predict gastric cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol 2013;48:1249–1256.ArticlePubMed
  • 35. Sekikawa A, Fukui H, Sada R, et al. Gastric atrophy and xanthelasma are markers for predicting the development of early gastric cancer. J Gastroenterol 2016;51:35–42.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 36. Sugimoto M, Ban H, Ichikawa H, et al. Efficacy of the Kyoto classification of gastritis in identifying patients at high risk for gastric cancer. Intern Med 2017;56:579–586.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 37. Shichijo S, Hirata Y, Niikura R, et al. Histologic intestinal metaplasia and endoscopic atrophy are predictors of gastric cancer development after Helicobacter pylori eradication. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;84:618–624.ArticlePubMed
  • 38. Uemura N, Okamoto S, Yamamoto S, et al. Helicobacter pylori infection and the development of gastric cancer. N Engl J Med 2001;345:784–789.ArticlePubMed
  • 39. Hosokawa O, Watanabe K, Hatorri M, Douden K, Hayashi H, Kaizaki Y. Detection of gastric cancer by repeat endoscopy within a short time after negative examination. Endoscopy 2001;33:301–305.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 40. Majima A, Handa O, Naito Y, et al. Early-stage gastric cancer can be found in improved atrophic mucosa over time from successful Helicobacter pylori eradication. Digestion 2017;95:194–200.ArticlePubMed
  • 41. Fukase K, Kato M, Kikuchi S, et al. Effect of eradication of Helicobacter pylori on incidence of metachronous gastric carcinoma after endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer: an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372:392–397.ArticlePubMed
  • 42. Mori G, Nakajima T, Asada K, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for metachronous gastric cancer after endoscopic resection and successful Helicobacter pylori eradication: results of a large-scale, multicenter cohort study in Japan. Gastric Cancer 2016;19:911–918.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 43. Nam HS, Kim HW, Choi CW, et al. Characteristics of overlooked synchronous gastric epithelial neoplasia after endoscopic submucosal dissection. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97:e12536.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 44. Quach DT, Le HM, Hiyama T, Nguyen OT, Nguyen TS, Uemura N. Relationship between endoscopic and histologic gastric atrophy and intestinal metaplasia. Helicobacter 2013;18:151–157.ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  
    • Relationship between gastric mucosal atrophy, cystic dilatation, and histopathological characteristics
      Yang-Kun Wang, Ping Li, Hai-Ying He, Fa-Shun Zhang, Xiao-Ling Jiang, Ren-Bing Zhang, Su-Nan Wang, Si-Liang Xu
      BMC Gastroenterology.2025;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Gastric Premalignant Conditions
      Douglas R. Morgan, Juan E. Corral, Dan Li, Elizabeth A. Montgomery, Arnoldo Riquelme, John J. Kim, Bryan Sauer, Shailja C. Shah
      American Journal of Gastroenterology.2025; 120(4): 709.     CrossRef
    • Endoscopic diagnosis and prevalence of early gastric cancer in India: A prospective study
      Ashutosh Mohapatra, Sonmoon Mohapatra, Shruti Mahawar, Krushna Chandra Pani, Nachiketa Mohapatra, Mohan Ramchandani, Nageshwar Reddy, Mahesh K. Goenka, Noriya Uedo
      DEN Open.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Clinical and morphological characteristics of patients with chronic gastritis and high risk of gastric cancer
      A. S. Tertychnyy, D. D. Protsenko, N. V. Pachuashvili, D. P. Nagornaya, P. V. Pavlov, A. P. Kiruhin, A. A. Fedorenko
      Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology.2024; (9): 107.     CrossRef
    • Comparison between the GastroPanel test and the serum pepsinogen assay interpreted with the ABC method—A prospective study
      Sun‐Young Lee, Yeon‐Sun Ahn, Hee‐Won Moon
      Helicobacter.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • The value of LCI-based modified Kyoto classification risk scoring system in predicting the risk of early gastric cancer
      Chao Gao, Guanpo Zhang, Jin Zheng, Yunmeng Zheng, Wulian Lin, Guilin Xu, Yixiang You, Dazhou Li, Wen Wang
      Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology.2024; 59(7): 859.     CrossRef
    • Incidence of Gastric Adenocarcinoma in Those With Gastric Atrophy: A Systematic Review
      Eoghan Burke, Patricia Harkins, Mayilone Arumugasamy
      Cureus.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Endoscopic and clinical characteristics of autoimmune atrophic gastritis: Retrospective study
      Kareem Khalaf, Yusuke Fujiyoshi, Robert Bechara
      Endoscopy International Open.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Identification of serum microRNAs as potential diagnostic biomarkers for detecting precancerous lesions of gastric cancer
      Hajime Otsu, Sho Nambara, Qingjiang Hu, Yuichi Hisamatsu, Takeo Toshima, Kazuki Takeishi, Yusuke Yonemura, Takaaki Masuda, Eiji Oki, Koshi Mimori
      Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery.2023; 7(1): 63.     CrossRef
    • Evolution of the Correa's cascade steps: A long-term endoscopic surveillance among non-ulcer dyspepsia and gastric ulcer after H. pylori eradication
      Hsiu-Chi Cheng, Yao-Jong Yang, Hsiao-Bai Yang, Yu-Ching Tsai, Wei-Lun Chang, Chung-Tai Wu, Hsin-Yu Kuo, Yu-Ting Yu, Er-Hsiang Yang, Wei-Chun Cheng, Wei-Ying Chen, Bor-Shyang Sheu
      Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.2023; 122(5): 400.     CrossRef
    • Vietnam Association of Gastroenterology (VNAGE) consensus on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection
      Duc Trong Quach, Bang Hong Mai, Mien Kieu Tran, Long Van Dao, Huy Van Tran, Khanh Truong Vu, Khien Van Vu, Ho Thi-Thu Pham, Hoang Huu Bui, Dung Dang-Quy Ho, Dung Tuan Trinh, Vinh Thuy Nguyen, Thai Hong Duong, Tuong Thi-Khanh Tran, Ha Thi-Viet Nguyen, Thin
      Frontiers in Medicine.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Endoscopic Screening for Missed Lesions of Synchronous Multiple Early Gastric Cancer during Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection
      Jiangnan Wan, Yi Fang, Haizhong Jiang, Bujiang Wang, Lei Xu, Chunjiu Hu, Honghui Chen, Xiaoyun Ding, Tatsuya Toyokawa
      Gastroenterology Research and Practice.2023; 2023: 1.     CrossRef
    • Morphometric features of gastric mucosa in atrophic gastritis: A different pattern between corpus and antrum
      Xue-Mei Lin, Li Wang, Chun-Hui Xi, Jun Wang, Xian-Fei Wang, Qiong Wang, Cong Yuan
      Medicine.2023; 102(14): e33480.     CrossRef
    • Predicting reflux symptom recurrence: The impact of gastroesophageal junction indicators and body mass index among outpatients
      Qing Wang, Junhui Lu, Yue Sui, Jing Fan, Jinnan Ren, Zhenzhen Wang, Xing Chen
      Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Helicobacter pylori intragastric colonization and migration: Endoscopic manifestations and potential mechanisms
      Tong Mu, Zhi-Ming Lu, Wen-Wen Wang, Hua Feng, Yan Jin, Qian Ding, Li-Fen Wang
      World Journal of Gastroenterology.2023; 29(30): 4616.     CrossRef
    • Factors associated with heterochronic gastric cancer development post-endoscopic mucosal dissection in early gastric cancer patients
      Bing Xie, Yun Xia, Xia Wang, Yan Xiong, Shao-Bo Chen, Jie Zhang, Wei-Wei He
      World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2023; 15(9): 1644.     CrossRef
    • Kimura–Takemoto Classification: A Tool to Predict Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Progression to Advanced Gastric Neoplasia
      Leyla Maric, Daniel Castaneda, Harjinder Singh, Pablo Bejarano, Brenda Jimenez Cantisano, Fernando J. Castro
      Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2022; 67(8): 4092.     CrossRef
    • Consistency between the endoscopic Kyoto classification and pathological updated Sydney system for gastritis: A cross‐sectional study
      Osamu Toyoshima, Toshihiro Nishizawa, Shuntaro Yoshida, Tatsuya Matsuno, Nariaki Odawara, Akira Toyoshima, Kosuke Sakitani, Hidenobu Watanabe, Mitsuhiro Fujishiro, Hidekazu Suzuki
      Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 37(2): 291.     CrossRef
    • Diagnostic Accuracy of H. pylori Status by Conventional Endoscopy: Time-Trend Change After Eradication and Impact of Endoscopic Image Quality
      Duc Trong Quach, Rika Aoki, Akiko Iga, Quang Dinh Le, Toru Kawamura, Ken Yamashita, Shinji Tanaka, Masaharu Yoshihara, Toru Hiyama
      Frontiers in Medicine.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Relevance of pepsinogen, gastrin, and endoscopic atrophy in the diagnosis of autoimmune gastritis
      Hiroshi Kishikawa, Kenji Nakamura, Keisuke Ojiro, Tadashi Katayama, Kyoko Arahata, Sakiko Takarabe, Aya Sasaki, Soichiro Miura, Yukie Hayashi, Hitomi Hoshi, Takanori Kanai, Jiro Nishida
      Scientific Reports.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Tauroursodeoxycholic Acid Inhibits Nuclear Factor Kappa B Signaling in Gastric Epithelial Cells and Ameliorates Gastric Mucosal Damage in Mice
      Su Hwan Kim, Ji Won Kim, Seong-Joon Koh, Sang Gyun Kim, Jeong Mo Bae, Jung Ho Kim, Jeong Hwan Park, Mee Soo Chang, Kee Don Choi, Hyoun Woo Kang, Byeong Gwan Kim, Kook Lae Lee
      The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology.2022; 79(4): 161.     CrossRef
    • Serum pepsinogen: A potential non-invasive screening method for moderate and severe atrophic gastritis among an asian population
      Cong Long Nguyen, Tran Tien Dao, Thi-Thuy Ngan Phi, The Phuong Nguyen, Van Tuyen Pham, Truong Khanh Vu
      Annals of Medicine and Surgery.2022; 78: 103844.     CrossRef
    • Risk factors for early gastric cancer: focus on Helicobacter pylori gastritis
      Hee Seok Moon
      Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(5): 259.     CrossRef
    • Current status of the gastric cancer screening program in Korea
      Young-Il Kim, Il Ju Choi
      Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(5): 250.     CrossRef
    • Endoscopic diagnosis of early gastric cancer
      Dong Chan Joo, Gwang Ha Kim
      Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(5): 267.     CrossRef
    • Current Evidence for a Paradigm Shift in Gastric Cancer Prevention From Endoscopic Screening toHelicobacter pyloriEradication in Korea
      Young-Il Kim, Il Ju Choi
      Journal of Gastric Cancer.2022; 22(3): 169.     CrossRef
    • Need for improvement in the evaluation of pre‐malignant upper gastro‐intestinal lesions in India: Results of a nationwide survey
      Deepak Madhu, Veeraraghavan Krishnamurthy, Thirumoorthi Natarajan, Sundeep Lakhtakia
      Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 37(11): 2113.     CrossRef
    • Usefulness of the Kyoto Classification Score for Prediction of Current Helicobacter pylori Infection
      Heejun Kang, Chul-Hyun Lim, Sukil Kim, Arum Choi, Jung-Hwan Oh
      The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research.2022; 22(4): 281.     CrossRef
    • The simplified Kyoto classification score is consistent with the ABC method of classification as a grading system for endoscopic gastritis
      Toshihiro Nishizawa, Osamu Toyoshima, Ryo Kondo, Kazuma Sekiba, Yosuke Tsuji, Hirotoshi Ebinuma, Hidekazu Suzuki, Chizu Tanikawa, Koichi Matsuda, Kazuhiko Koike
      Journal of Clinical Biochemistry and Nutrition.2021; 68(1): 101.     CrossRef
    • Endoscopic grading of gastric atrophy on risk assessment of gastric neoplasia: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
      Shiyu Xiao, Yihan Fan, Zhihao Yin, Liya Zhou
      Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2021; 36(1): 55.     CrossRef
    • Gastritis: The clinico-pathological spectrum
      Massimo Rugge, Edoardo Savarino, Marta Sbaraglia, Ludovica Bricca, Peter Malfertheiner
      Digestive and Liver Disease.2021; 53(10): 1237.     CrossRef
    • Efficacy of Seven-Day Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker-Based First-LineHelicobacter PyloriEradication Therapy Administered with Bismuth
      Ji Yeon Kim, Sun-Young Lee, Hyobin Kim, Jeong Hwan Kim, In-Kyung Sung, Hyung Seok Park
      Yonsei Medical Journal.2021; 62(8): 708.     CrossRef
    • Second-Line Bismuth-Containing Quadruple Therapy for Helicobacterpylori Infection: A 12-Year Study of Annual Eradication Rates
      Kiwon Shin, Min-Jae Cho, Jung-Hwan Oh, Chul-Hyun Lim
      Journal of Clinical Medicine.2021; 10(15): 3273.     CrossRef
    • Predictive Significance of Promoter DNA Methylation of Cysteine Dioxygenase Type 1 (CDO1) in Metachronous Gastric Cancer
      Yo Kubota, Satoshi Tanabe, Mizutomo Azuma, Kazue Horio, Yoshiki Fujiyama, Takafumi Soeno, Yasuaki Furue, Takuya Wada, Akinori Watanabe, Kenji Ishido, Chikatoshi Katada, Keishi Yamashita, Wasaburo Koizumi, Chika Kusano
      Journal of Gastric Cancer.2021; 21(4): 379.     CrossRef
    • Gastrointestinal Microbiota Changes in Patients With Gastric Precancerous Lesions
      Dehua Liu, Si Chen, Yawen Gou, Wenyong Yu, Hangcheng Zhou, Rutong Zhang, Jinghao Wang, Fei Ye, Yingling Liu, Baolin Sun, Kaiguang Zhang
      Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology.2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Use of endoscopic assessment of gastric atrophy for gastric cancer risk stratification to reduce the need for gastric mapping
      Duc Trong Quach, Toru Hiyama, Huy Minh Le, Trung Sao Nguyen, Takuji Gotoda
      Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology.2020; 55(4): 402.     CrossRef
    • Influence of hypergastrinemia secondary to long-term proton pump inhibitor treatment on ECL cell tumorigenesis in human gastric mucosa
      Atsushi Tatsuguchi, Shintaro Hoshino, Noriyuki Kawami, Katya Gudis, Tsutomu Nomura, Akira Shimizu, Katsuhiko Iwakiri
      Pathology - Research and Practice.2020; 216(10): 153113.     CrossRef
    • Chronic atrophic gastritis detection with a convolutional neural network considering stomach regions
      Misaki Kanai, Ren Togo, Takahiro Ogawa, Miki Haseyama
      World Journal of Gastroenterology.2020; 26(25): 3650.     CrossRef
    • Naiv Helicobacter pylori pozitif ve negatif hastaların klinik, demografik ve endoskopik karakteristikleri: Retrospektif analiz
      Muhammet AYDIN
      Endoskopi Gastrointestinal.2020; 28(2): 39.     CrossRef
    • Gastrointestinal Microbiota Changes in Patients With Gastric Precancerous Lesions
      Dehua Liu, Si Chen, Yawen Gou, Wenyong Yu, Hangcheng Zhou, Rutong Zhang, Jinghao Wang, Fei Ye, Yingling Liu, Baolin Sun, Kaiguang Zhang
      SSRN Electronic Journal .2020;[Epub]     CrossRef

    • PubReader PubReader
    • ePub LinkePub Link
    • Cite
      CITE
      export Copy Download
      Close
      Download Citation
      Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
      Format:
      • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
      • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
      Include:
      • Citation for the content below
      Assessment of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy according to the Kimura-Takemoto Classification and Its Potential Application in Daily Practice
      Clin Endosc. 2019;52(4):321-327.   Published online July 22, 2019
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2019.072
      Close
    • XML DownloadXML Download
    Figure
    • 0
    • 1
    • 2
    Assessment of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy according to the Kimura-Takemoto Classification and Its Potential Application in Daily Practice
    Image Image Image
    Fig. 1. Atrophic border on the greater curvature (A) and lesser curvature (B). The gastric mucosa shows differences in level and color between the 2 sides of the atrophic border. The endoscopic atrophic border represents both the transition from non-atrophic gastric mucosa to atrophic gastric mucosa and the transition from fundic glands to pyloric glands in a non-atrophic stomach [6]. Its presence, however, does not always mean that a patient has gastric mucosal atrophy. The term “atrophic border” is not accurate and might cause some misunderstanding, but is still used in daily practice due to its historical meaning.
    Fig. 2. Extension of the atrophic border (red line) and patterns of endoscopic gastric atrophy as classified by Kimura and Takemoto [13].
    Fig. 3. A 24-year-old Vietnamese female underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for epigastric pain. The patient had no alarming features. (A, B) White-light endoscopy clearly demonstrated moderate endoscopic gastric atrophy (type O-1), even with an older-generation gastroscope (Olympus EXERA-GIF 160 Video Gastroscope; Olympus Co., Tokyo, Japan), which prompted the endoscopist to search carefully for gastric cancer. (C) An easily-missed subtle change (yellow box) could be identified on the greater curvature of the corpus. (D) The gastroscope was advanced closer to the suspicious area and more air was insufflated. A small 0-IIc lesion hidden beneath gastric mucosal folds was identified. This lesion was diagnosed as undifferentiated adenocarcinoma on pathology.

    Fig. 1.

    Fig. 2.

    Fig. 3.

    Assessment of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy according to the Kimura-Takemoto Classification and Its Potential Application in Daily Practice
    Study Type of study Number of patients H. pylori status Follow-up period (yr) Number of cancer EGA severity as risk factor Other risk factors
    Uemura et al. [38] Prospective cohort study 1,526 Before eradication 7.8 36 Severe (O-2, O-3) Corpus-predominant gastritis
    Intestinal metaplasia
    Kaji et al. [29] Retrospective cohort study 12,941 N/A 3.6 63 Open type > C-2, C-3 > C-1, C-0 Age ≥62
    Presence of ulcer
    Uric acid level
    Hosokawa et al. [39] Retrospective cohort study 3,672 N/A 1.9 32 Severe (O2, O3) Age (60–69)
    Masuyama et al. [26] Cross-sectional 27,777 N/A 13 407 C-2 or more severe
    Sekikawa et al. [35] Retrospective cohort study 1,823 N/A 8.0 29 Open type Gastric xanthelasma
    Sugimoto et al. [36] Cross-sectional 1,200 N/A 4.6 79 Severe (O-2, O-3) Intestinal metaplasia
    Take et al. [30] Prospective cohort study 1,674 Post successful eradication 14.1 28 Open type, C-3
    Toyoshima et al. [31] Retrospective cohort study 1,232 Post successful eradication 2.5 15 Open type > C-2, C-3 -
    Shichijo et al. [37] Retrospective cohort study 573 Post successful eradication 6.2 21 Open type > C-2, C-3 > C-1, C-0 Intestinal metaplasia
    Sakitani et al. [33] Retrospective cohort study 965 Post successful eradication 4.5 21 O-2, O-3 -
    Kodama et al. [34] Retrospective cohort study 2,355 Post successful eradication 2.4 33 C-3 or more severe Intestinal metaplasia
    Study Type of study Number of patients Patients’ characteristics Duration of study (yr) Type and number of patients with gastric neoplasm EGA severity as a high-risk factor Other high-risk factors
    Mori et al. [42] Retrospective cohort study 594 After EMR/ESD 4.5 79 (MGC) Severe (O-2/O-3) Male
    Successful H. pylori eradication Number of GC before successful H. pylori eradication
    Masuyama et al. [26] Cross-sectional 272 N/A 13.0 30 (SGC) Open type -
    20 (MGC)
    Nam et al. [43] Retrospective cohort study 488 After ESD / Surgery 3.1 18 (MGC) C-3 or more severe Age ≥65
    7 (MHD) elevated morphology of primary lesions
    52 (MLD)
    Table 1. The Severity of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy at Baseline as a Risk Factor of Gastric Cancer Development

    EGA, endoscopic gastric atrophy; N/A, not applicable.

    Table 2. The Severity of Endoscopic Gastric Atrophy at Baseline as a Risk Factor of Synchronous and Metachronous Gastric Cancer

    Synchronous gastric cancer (SGC), synchronous high-grade dysplasia and synchronous low-grade dysplasia were defined as gastric epithelial neoplastic lesions that have already been detected before the initial endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or found endoscopically and confirmed pathologically with endoscopic forceps biopsy within 1 year of ESD. Metachronous gastric cancer (MGC) was defined as a new GC detected at least 1 year after successful H. pylori eradication and located in an area other than the site of the previous endoscopic resection.

    EGA, endoscopic gastric atrophy; EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection; MHD, metachronous high-grade dysplasia; MLD, metachronous low-grade dysplasia; N/A, no applicable.

    Table 1.

    Table 2.

    Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
    © Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
    Close layer
    TOP