Cheung Dae Young, Choi Soo Kyoung, Kim Hyung-Keun, Kim Sung Soo, Chae Hiun-Suk, Seo Kyung Jin, Cho Young-Seok
Department of Internal Medicine, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 10 63-ro, Seoul, 150-713, Korea.
Surg Endosc. 2015 Jun;29(6):1500-5. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3831-0. Epub 2014 Oct 3.
Small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated with endoscopic resection. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been accepted as a reliable technique, but it is difficult. We evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of precut and endoscopic mucosal resection (CSI-EMR) for rectal NETs compared to ESD.
Patients with rectal NETs were enrolled consecutively. ESD or CSI-EMR was performed at operator's discretion. Histological and clinical outcomes were measured and compared between the two treatment modalities.
Thirty-three patients were enrolled in the study. Seventeen NETs were treated by the ESD method and 16 were treated by CSI-EMR. Both groups had similar mean tumor diameters (ESD 7.53 ± 1.94 vs. CSI-EMR 6.63 ± 1.99 mm; p = 0.197). En bloc resection was achieved in 100 % of ESD group and 87.5 % of CSI-EMR group. Lateral margin involvement occurred in one patient in ESD group and two in CSI-EMR group. The histologically complete resection rate was 88.2 % (15 of 17) in the ESD group and 81.2 % (13 of 16) in CSI-EMR group (p = 0.592). One case of perforation occurred in both groups. Delayed bleeding did not occur. None of the measured outcomes were different between the two groups. Operating time was significant shorter in CSI-EMR group than in ESD group (9.69 vs. 20.12 min, respectively; p value = 0.004).
CSI-EMR results in reliable clinical outcomes for small rectal NETs comparable to those of ESD. CSI-EMR is technically feasible and more time saving.
小的直肠神经内分泌肿瘤(NETs)可采用内镜下切除术治疗。内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)已被公认为一种可靠的技术,但操作难度较大。我们评估了预切开内镜黏膜切除术(CSI-EMR)与ESD相比治疗直肠NETs的可行性和疗效。
连续纳入直肠NETs患者。由术者决定行ESD或CSI-EMR。测量并比较两种治疗方式的组织学和临床结局。
33例患者纳入本研究。17例NETs采用ESD方法治疗,16例采用CSI-EMR治疗。两组的平均肿瘤直径相似(ESD组7.53±1.94mm vs. CSI-EMR组6.63±1.99mm;p = 0.197)。ESD组100%实现整块切除,CSI-EMR组为87.5%。ESD组有1例患者切缘阳性,CSI-EMR组有2例。ESD组组织学完全切除率为88.2%(17例中的15例),CSI-EMR组为81.2%(16例中的13例)(p = 0.592)。两组均发生1例穿孔。未发生迟发性出血。两组间各项测量结局均无差异。CSI-EMR组的手术时间显著短于ESD组(分别为9.69分钟和20.12分钟;p值 = 0.004)。
对于小的直肠NETs,CSI-EMR的临床结局与ESD相当。CSI-EMR在技术上可行且更节省时间。