Transrectal ultrasonography of a small rectal carcinoid tumor with lymph node metastasis: a case report

A small, well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumor with multiple lymph node metastases: A case report

The incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumor (NET), which is often diagnosed during routine surveillance endoscopy, is increasing. The majority of these tumors are small and asymptomatic, possessing benign features with favorable prognoses. At present, small rectal NETs without high-risk factors are typically treated by local resection, including endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, or transanal endoscopic microsurgery, with or without additional imaging follow-up by abdominal computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. The present study, however, describes a case of a small rectal NET without any known risk factors, which was accompanied by substantial locoregional lymph node metastasis, underscoring the importance of imaging studies for rectal NETs.

Multiple rectal neuroendocrine tumors: report of five cases

Carcinoids are slow growing neuroendocrine tumors (NET) originating in the enterochromaffin cells of the gastrointestinal tract. In previous studies, rectal NET comprised only about 1% of all anorectal neoplasms; however, the incidence of rectal NET has shown a recent increase. Typically, rectal NET presents as a single subepithelial nodule, and multicentricity of rectal NETs is rare, with reported incidence of 2-4.5%. Due to the rarity of multiple rectal NETs, there is no consensus or guidelines for treatment of multiple rectal NETs. However, NETs of the rectum that are less than 10 mm in diameter and do not infiltrate the muscularis propria, without distant metastasis, can be removed by endoscopy, as with solitary rectal NET. We encountered five cases of multiple rectal NETs which were treated successfully by endoscopy.

Successful endoscopic mucosal resection of a low esophageal carcinoid tumor

Esophageal carcinoid tumors remain some of the rarest of all carcinoid tumors, with only several cases previously reported in the literature. The endoscopic mucosal resection of selected carcinoid tumors has been shown to be a valid, safe, and effective method of treatment. Endoscopic ultrasonography is the technique of choice to select patients eligible for endoscopic resection. Here, we report successful endoscopic mucosal resection of a low esophageal carcinoid tumor and review the relevant literature. The present case is the first reported case of esophageal carcinoid tumor in Korea.

Clinicopathological characteristics of rectal carcinoid patients undergoing surgical resection

The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical aspects, histopathological features and prognosis of patients with rectal carcinoids, focusing on properties associated with metastasis, in order to gain insights into appropriate management. A total of 20 patients (15 males, 5 females; mean age, 54.9 years; range, 23-71) who underwent surgery for rectal carcinoid tumors at the Department of Colorectal Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, between May 2000 and January 2011 were analyzed. Ki-67 immunostaining was performed in 13 cases with available tumor tissue specimens. Of the 20 patients, a radical operation including rectal resection with a lymphadenectomy was performed in 16. The mean tumor size was 11.9 mm (3-25 mm) and lymph node metastasis was confirmed in 9 cases, including 3 with lesions no greater than 7 mm in diameter. Overall, 16 (80%) of the tumors were localized in the submucosal layer and 4 (20%) involved the proper muscle layer. Ki-67 labeling index and lymphovascular invasion were shown to be associated with lymph node and/or distant metastasis by multiple logistic regression analysis, but were not statistically significant in ANOVA findings. Lymph node metastasis from rectal carcinoids, even those smaller than 10 mm in diameter, was not a rare event. More attention should be given to decision-making, including the possibility of endoscopic resection for the treatment of rectal carcinoid tumors regardless of size.

Preoperative staging of rectal cancer

Preoperative staging is now an essential factor in the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer because tumor stage is the strongest predictive factor for recurrence. Preoperative staging of rectal cancer can be divided into either local or distant staging. Local staging incorporates the assessment of mural wall invasion, circumferential resection margin involvement, as well as the nodal status for metastasis. Distant staging assesses for evidence of metastatic disease. The aim of this review is to consider the indications and limitations of the current preoperative imaging modalities for rectal cancer staging including clinical examination, endorectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and positron emission tomography–computed tomography, with respect to local and distant disease.

Effectiveness of preoperative staging in rectal cancer: digital rectal examination, endoluminal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging?

In rectal cancer, preoperative staging should identify early tumours suitable for treatment by surgery alone and locally advanced tumours that require therapy to induce tumour regression from the potential resection margin. Currently, local staging can be performed by digital rectal examination (DRE), endoluminal ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Each staging method was compared for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness. The accuracy of high-resolution MRI, DRE and EUS in identifying favourable, unfavourable and locally advanced rectal carcinomas in 98 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision was compared prospectively against the resection specimen pathological as the gold standard. Agreement between each staging modality with pathology assessment of tumour favourability was calculated with the chance-corrected agreement given as the kappa statistic, based on marginal homogenised data. Differences in effectiveness of the staging modalities were compared with differences in costs of the staging modalities to generate cost effectiveness ratios. Agreement between staging and histologic assessment of tumour favourability was 94% for MRI (κ=0.81, s.e.=0.05; κ_W=0.83), compared with very poor agreements of 65% for DRE (κ=0.08, s.e.=0.068, κ_W=0.16) and 69% for EUS (κ=0.17, s.e.=0.065, κ_W=0.17). The resource benefits resulting from the use of MRI rather than DRE was £67164 and £92244 when MRI was used rather than EUS. Magnetic resonance imaging dominated both DRE and EUS on cost and clinical effectiveness by selecting appropriate patients for neoadjuvant therapy and justifies its use for local staging of rectal cancer patients.

Small rectal carcinoid with lymph node metastasis diagnosed prior to treatment

We treated a 59-year-old man with a small, yellowish, submucosal rectal tumour that was detected incidentally during a colonoscopic examination. Endoscopic ultrasonography revealed a hypoechoic submucosal tumour 13 mm in diameter. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging studies were performed, and pararectal and para-obturator lymph node involvement was confirmed. The patient underwent Miles' operation with lymph node dissection; 24 months later, he is disease free. We were able to diagnose rectal carcinoid tumour and evaluate the lymph node metastasis prior to surgery. Even with a small carcinoid, it is important to determine the depth of invasion and the presence of lymph node metastasis prior to treatment.