Comparison of endoscopic resection therapies for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

AIMS

This study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), clip-and-snare assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the endoscopic resection of rectal NETs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 47 patients with rectal NETs who underwent endoscopic treatment in The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. Manifestations of clinic pathological characteristics, complications, procedure time and hospitalization costs were studied.

RESULTS

The complete resection rates with CS-EMR and ESD were significantly higher than those with EMR (CS-EMR vs. EMR,  = 0.038; ESD vs. EMR,  = 0.04), but no significant difference was found between the CS-EMR and ESD groups ( = 0.383). The lateral margin was less distant in the CS-EMR group than in the ESD group and there was no difference with regard to vertical margin (lateral margin distance, 1500 ± 3125 vs.3000 ± 3000 μm; vertical margin distance, 400 ± 275 vs.500 ± 500 μm). Compared to ESD, CS-EMR required less operation time ( < 0.01) and money ( < 0.01) and reduced the length of hospital stays ( < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The CS-EMR technique is more effective and efficient than EMR for small rectal NETs. In addition, CS-EMR reduces procedure time, duration of post-procedure hospitalization and decreases patients' cost compared to ESD while ensuring sufficient vertical margin distances.