PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) on histologic complete resection for the treatment of small rectal carcinoid tumors in comparison with the treatment with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) alone. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with small rectal carcinoid tumors were enrolled prospectively for ESMR-L, and we retrospectively reviewed 74 carcinoid tumor patients who underwent EMR. The comparison between ESMR-L and EMR groups was analyzed including endoscopic and histologic complete resection and complications after resection. We also evaluated the associations of histologic complete resection with clinical and procedure-related factors. RESULTS: The histologic complete resection rate was significantly higher in ESMR-L than in EMR (94.3% vs. 75.7%, P=0.019). In addition, the resection time was significantly shorter in ESMR-L than in EMR (4.16±1.48 min vs. 5.11±2.47 min, respectively, P=0.014). Moreover, previously biopsied rectal carcinoid tumors were significantly associated with histologic incomplete resection, especially in patients who underwent EMR (odds ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.92-20.58; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EMR, ESMR-L is a safe and effective method for histologic complete resection of small rectal carcinoid tumors, especially in patients with previously biopsied carcinoid tumors.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) on histologic complete resection for the treatment of small rectal carcinoid tumors in comparison with the treatment with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) alone. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with small rectal carcinoid tumors were enrolled prospectively for ESMR-L, and we retrospectively reviewed 74 carcinoid tumorpatients who underwent EMR. The comparison between ESMR-L and EMR groups was analyzed including endoscopic and histologic complete resection and complications after resection. We also evaluated the associations of histologic complete resection with clinical and procedure-related factors. RESULTS: The histologic complete resection rate was significantly higher in ESMR-L than in EMR (94.3% vs. 75.7%, P=0.019). In addition, the resection time was significantly shorter in ESMR-L than in EMR (4.16±1.48 min vs. 5.11±2.47 min, respectively, P=0.014). Moreover, previously biopsied rectal carcinoid tumors were significantly associated with histologic incomplete resection, especially in patients who underwent EMR (odds ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.92-20.58; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EMR, ESMR-L is a safe and effective method for histologic complete resection of small rectal carcinoid tumors, especially in patients with previously biopsied carcinoid tumors.