BACKGROUND: The optimal surgical management for 1- to 2-cm, nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine overall survival and operative outcomes in patients who underwentlocal excision versus radical resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors. DESIGN: The National Cancer Database (2004-2013) was queried to identify patients with nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors who underwentlocal excision or radical resection. SETTING: The study included national data. PATIENTS: There were 274 patients in the local excision group and 47 patients in the radical resection group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay, and procedural outcomes. RESULTS: There were no differences in demographics between the 2 groups. Patients who underwentradical resection had slightly larger tumors with higher stage and grade. Patients undergoing local excision had higher rates of positive margins (8.23% vs 0%; p = 0.04). There were no deaths within 30 days in either group, but patients who had radical resection had longer median hospital length of stay (0 vs 3 d; p < 0.01). After adjusting with a Cox proportional hazards model, no difference was seen in survival between the 2 patient groups (HR = 2.39 (95% CI, 0.85-6.70); p = 0.10). LIMITATIONS: There are several limitations, which include that this work is a retrospective review; the data set does not include variables such as depth of tumor invasion, which may influence surgical treatment or local recurrence rates; and patients were not randomly assigned to treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is no survival benefit to radical resection of 1- to 2-cm, nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors. This suggests that local excision may be a feasible and less morbid option for intermediate-sized rectal neuroendocrine tumors. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A744.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The optimal surgical management for 1- to 2-cm, nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine overall survival and operative outcomes in patients who underwent local excision versus radical resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors. DESIGN: The National Cancer Database (2004-2013) was queried to identify patients with nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors who underwent local excision or radical resection. SETTING: The study included national data. PATIENTS: There were 274 patients in the local excision group and 47 patients in the radical resection group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay, and procedural outcomes. RESULTS: There were no differences in demographics between the 2 groups. Patients who underwent radical resection had slightly larger tumors with higher stage and grade. Patients undergoing local excision had higher rates of positive margins (8.23% vs 0%; p = 0.04). There were no deaths within 30 days in either group, but patients who had radical resection had longer median hospital length of stay (0 vs 3 d; p < 0.01). After adjusting with a Cox proportional hazards model, no difference was seen in survival between the 2 patient groups (HR = 2.39 (95% CI, 0.85-6.70); p = 0.10). LIMITATIONS: There are several limitations, which include that this work is a retrospective review; the data set does not include variables such as depth of tumor invasion, which may influence surgical treatment or local recurrence rates; and patients were not randomly assigned to treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is no survival benefit to radical resection of 1- to 2-cm, nonmetastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumors. This suggests that local excision may be a feasible and less morbid option for intermediate-sized rectal neuroendocrine tumors. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A744.
Authors: Caroline Fine; Guillaume Roquin; Eric Terrebonne; Thierry Lecomte; Romain Coriat; Christine Do Cao; Louis de Mestier; Elise Coffin; Guillaume Cadiot; Patricia Nicolli; Vincent Lepiliez; Vincent Hautefeuille; Jeanne Ramos; Paul Girot; Sophie Dominguez; Fritz-Line V Céphise; Julien Forestier; Valérie Hervieu; Mathieu Pioche; Thomas Walter Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 4.623