Cargando…

Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND: Modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is considered a treatment option for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) <10 mm in diameter. In this study, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) and EMR with a ligating device (EMR-L). METHODS: We retrospectively an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Jin, Park, Yong Eun, Choi, Joon Hyuk, Heo, Nae-Yun, Park, Jongha, Park, Seung Ha, Moon, Young Soo, Nam, Kyung Han, Kim, Tae Oh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7315720/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32624659
http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0485
_version_ 1783550314875453440
author Lee, Jin
Park, Yong Eun
Choi, Joon Hyuk
Heo, Nae-Yun
Park, Jongha
Park, Seung Ha
Moon, Young Soo
Nam, Kyung Han
Kim, Tae Oh
author_facet Lee, Jin
Park, Yong Eun
Choi, Joon Hyuk
Heo, Nae-Yun
Park, Jongha
Park, Seung Ha
Moon, Young Soo
Nam, Kyung Han
Kim, Tae Oh
author_sort Lee, Jin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is considered a treatment option for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) <10 mm in diameter. In this study, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) and EMR with a ligating device (EMR-L). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 158 patients with 162 rectal NETs treated endoscopically at a single Korean tertiary hospital between March 2010 and November 2017. We evaluated the rates of endoscopic en bloc resection, histologic complete resection, and procedural complications according to the treatment method. RESULTS: Among 162 rectal NETs, 42 were treated with EMR-C and 120 with EMR-L. The endoscopic en bloc resection rate was higher in the EMR-L group than in the EMR-C group (100% vs. 92.9%, P=0.003). A trend was observed towards a superior histologic complete resection rate in the EMR-L group, but it was not statistically significant (92.5% vs. 83.3%, P=0.087). There were no significant differences in procedural complications (P=0.870). In a multivariate analysis, a tumor located ≥10 cm from the anal verge was related to histologic incomplete resection (P=0.039). CONCLUSION: EMR-L may be the preferable treatment method, considering both endoscopic en bloc resection rate and histologic complete resection rate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7315720
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73157202020-07-02 Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors Lee, Jin Park, Yong Eun Choi, Joon Hyuk Heo, Nae-Yun Park, Jongha Park, Seung Ha Moon, Young Soo Nam, Kyung Han Kim, Tae Oh Ann Gastroenterol Original Article BACKGROUND: Modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is considered a treatment option for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) <10 mm in diameter. In this study, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) and EMR with a ligating device (EMR-L). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 158 patients with 162 rectal NETs treated endoscopically at a single Korean tertiary hospital between March 2010 and November 2017. We evaluated the rates of endoscopic en bloc resection, histologic complete resection, and procedural complications according to the treatment method. RESULTS: Among 162 rectal NETs, 42 were treated with EMR-C and 120 with EMR-L. The endoscopic en bloc resection rate was higher in the EMR-L group than in the EMR-C group (100% vs. 92.9%, P=0.003). A trend was observed towards a superior histologic complete resection rate in the EMR-L group, but it was not statistically significant (92.5% vs. 83.3%, P=0.087). There were no significant differences in procedural complications (P=0.870). In a multivariate analysis, a tumor located ≥10 cm from the anal verge was related to histologic incomplete resection (P=0.039). CONCLUSION: EMR-L may be the preferable treatment method, considering both endoscopic en bloc resection rate and histologic complete resection rate. Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology 2020 2020-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7315720/ /pubmed/32624659 http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0485 Text en Copyright: © Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Lee, Jin
Park, Yong Eun
Choi, Joon Hyuk
Heo, Nae-Yun
Park, Jongha
Park, Seung Ha
Moon, Young Soo
Nam, Kyung Han
Kim, Tae Oh
Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title_full Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title_fullStr Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title_short Comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
title_sort comparison between cap-assisted and ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7315720/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32624659
http://dx.doi.org/10.20524/aog.2020.0485
work_keys_str_mv AT leejin comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT parkyongeun comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT choijoonhyuk comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT heonaeyun comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT parkjongha comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT parkseungha comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT moonyoungsoo comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT namkyunghan comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors
AT kimtaeoh comparisonbetweencapassistedandligationassistedendoscopicmucosalresectionforrectalneuroendocrinetumors