BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a new, widely accepted method for the treatment of early gastric cancer and was developed to increase the en bloc resection rate. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for small rectal carcinoid tumors. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out that included 43 patients with small rectal carcinoid tumors (< 10 mm). The cohort comprised two groups: Group A (N = 23) underwent conventional EMR from January 2004 to August 2005, while group B (N = 20) underwent ESD with needle-knife from September 2005 to December 2006. The rate of curative en bloc resection, the procedure time, and the incidence of complications were evaluated. RESULTS: The en bloc resection rate and the rate of completeness of resection of group B were higher than those of group A (100 vs. 87%, 100 vs. 52.5%, respectively). The average operation time required for resection was significantly longer in group B (28.4 ± 17.2 min) compared with group A (12.3 ± 15.4 min) (p < 0.05). None of the patients had immediate or delayed bleeding during the procedure. Perforation occurred in one case of group B and the patient recovered after several days of conservative treatment. Three patients had local recurrence after EMR, while no patient experienced recurrence after ESD. CONCLUSION: ESD, compared with conventional EMR, increased en bloc and histologically complete resection rates and may reduce local recurrence rate for small rectal carcinoid tumors. Increased operation time and complication risks with ESD remain problematic. Further technique and investigation are required to confirm the safety and to assess the long-term prognosis of ESD.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a new, widely accepted method for the treatment of early gastric cancer and was developed to increase the en bloc resection rate. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for small rectal carcinoid tumors. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out that included 43 patients with small rectal carcinoid tumors (< 10 mm). The cohort comprised two groups: Group A (N = 23) underwent conventional EMR from January 2004 to August 2005, while group B (N = 20) underwent ESD with needle-knife from September 2005 to December 2006. The rate of curative en bloc resection, the procedure time, and the incidence of complications were evaluated. RESULTS: The en bloc resection rate and the rate of completeness of resection of group B were higher than those of group A (100 vs. 87%, 100 vs. 52.5%, respectively). The average operation time required for resection was significantly longer in group B (28.4 ± 17.2 min) compared with group A (12.3 ± 15.4 min) (p < 0.05). None of the patients had immediate or delayed bleeding during the procedure. Perforation occurred in one case of group B and the patient recovered after several days of conservative treatment. Three patients had local recurrence after EMR, while no patient experienced recurrence after ESD. CONCLUSION: ESD, compared with conventional EMR, increased en bloc and histologically complete resection rates and may reduce local recurrence rate for small rectal carcinoid tumors. Increased operation time and complication risks with ESD remain problematic. Further technique and investigation are required to confirm the safety and to assess the long-term prognosis of ESD.
Authors: M Fujishiro; N Yahagi; M Nakamura; N Kakushima; S Kodashima; S Ono; K Kobayashi; T Hashimoto; N Yamamichi; A Tateishi; Y Shimizu; M Oka; K Ogura; T Kawabe; M Ichinose; M Omata Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: J H Moon; J H Kim; C H Park; J O Jung; W G Shin; J P Kim; K O Kim; T Hahn; K-S Yoo; S H Park; C K Park Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Y Fujimura; M Mizuno; M Takeda; I Sato; K Hoshika; J Uchida; T Kihara; T Mure; K Sano; T Moriya Journal: Endoscopy Date: 1993-08 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: H Yoshikane; H Goto; Y Niwa; M Matsui; S Ohashi; T Suzuki; E Hamajima; T Hayakawa Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Sang Heon Lee; Seun Ja Park; Hyung Hun Kim; Kyung Sun Ok; Ji Hyun Kim; Sam Ryong Jee; Sang Young Seol; Bo Mi Kim Journal: Clin Endosc Date: 2012-03-31
Authors: Sophie Sf Hon; Simon Sm Ng; Tiffany Cl Wong; Philip Wy Chiu; Tony Wc Mak; W W Leung; Janet Fy Lee Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-11-25