Endoscopic Resection for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Comparison of Endoscopic Submucosal Resection with Band Ligation and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and modified endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors

Although some studies have compared the treatment outcomes between modified endoscopic mucosal resection (m-EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), the results are based on the experience of experts from a single high-volume center. This multicenter study aimed to compare the outcomes between m-EMR and ESD for rectal NETs, with emphasis on the operator's level. Data of patients with rectal NETs treated using m-EMR or ESD at seven institutions that included general hospitals in Japan were retrospectively reviewed. Patients treated using m-EMR and those treated using ESD were matched for age, sex, lesion size, lesion location, and operator level through propensity score matching. The treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups. In total 304 patients (m-EMR = 178, ESD = 126) were included, with 218 in the matched groups (m-EMR = 109, ESD = 109). The R0 resection rate was not significantly different between the two groups (90.0% vs. 82.3%, P = .221). However, the procedural time was significantly shorter for the m-EMR group than that for the ESD group (6 vs. 26 min, P < .001). No significant difference in adverse events was observed between the two groups (postprocedure bleeding rate: 5.5% vs. 2.8%, P = .335; perforation rate: 0.9% vs. 0.9%, P = 1.00). Subgroup analysis revealed that the R0 resection rate for the trainees was significantly higher in the m-EMR group than in the ESD group (87.9% vs. 64.5%, P = .017). m-EMR is the preferred technique for the treatment of rectal NETs and should be considered, particularly for the trainees.

Metachronous Liver Metastasis during Long-term Follow-up after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of a Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasm

A 67-year-old woman underwent a screening colonoscopy, which revealed a 7-mm rectal subepithelial lesion. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) confirmed a grade 1 rectal neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN), and no further treatment was administered. One year after ESD, she was diagnosed with lung cancer, which recurred 4 years later and required chemotherapy. Nine years after ESD, multiple liver metastases from the rectal NEN were found, which were well controlled with radiofrequency ablation. The patient died 13 years after ESD due to the progression of lung cancer. This case highlights the need for long-term follow-up in patients with small rectal NENs treated with endoscopic resection.

Predictors of lymph node metastasis and survival in radically resected rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database analysis

BACKGROUND

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors are uncommon tumor types. Lymph node metastases may occur in up to 40%, potentially impacting decision-making. We aimed to assess risk factors for lymph node metastases of rectal neuroendocrine tumors and their association with overall and cancer-specific survival.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study involved patients with stage I to III rectal neuroendocrine tumors who underwent radical resection. Data were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2020). Patients with pathologic evidence of lymph node metastases were compared to those without lymph node metastases for baseline patient and tumor characteristics. The main outcomes were lymph node metastases, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

In total, 580 patients (50.9% male; mean age: 58.9 years) were included. The lymph node metastases rate was 37.1%. Independent predictors of lymph node metastases were Grade 2 neuroendocrine tumors (odds ratio: 8.06; P = .001), neuroendocrine carcinoma (odds ratio: 2.59, P = .006), large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (odds ratio: 4.89; P = .017), T2 tumors (odds ratio: 6.44; P < .001), T3 tumors (odds ratio: 27.5; P < .001), and T4 tumors (odds ratio: 17.3; P < .001). Lymph node metastases were associated with shorter restricted mean overall survival (40.8 vs 52.7 months; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (41.3 vs 54.8 months; P < .001). When adjusted for other confounders, the nodal status of rectal neuroendocrine tumors was not independently associated with overall (hazard ratio = 1.56; P = .165) or cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio = 1.69; P = .158). Significant factors associated with worse overall survival and cancer-specific survival were age, tumor size, neuroendocrine carcinomas, large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas, and the number of positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Lymph node metastases of rectal neuroendocrine tumors were more likely associated with high-grade, large-sized, and T2 to T4 tumors. The number of involved lymph nodes was an independent predictor of overall and cancer-specific survival. Other independent survival predictors were tumor grade, size, and T stage.

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of Endoscopic Methods for Rectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms with Low Malignant Potential: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

 Although endoscopic resection is an effective treatment of rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (R-NENs) with low malignant potential, there is no consensus on the most recommended endoscopic method. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and acceptability of different endoscopic treatments for R-NENs with low malignant potential.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 We searched databases for studies on treatments of R-NENs using endoscopic resection. These studies comprised techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRM), modified endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESDM), and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). The primary outcomes assessed were histological complete resection (HCR).

RESULTS

 Overall, 38 retrospective studies (3040 R-NENs) were identified. Endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap (EMRC), endoscopic mucosal resection with ligation (EMRL), ESD, ESDM, and TEM demonstrated higher resectability than did EMR in achieving HCR. Endoscopic mucosal resection, EMRC, EMRL, EMRP, EMRD, and EMRU required shorter operation times than did ESD. Endoscopic mucosal resection, EMRC, ESDM, and TEM incurred lower risks than did ESD.

CONCLUSION

 Regarding R-NENs <20 mm with low malignant potential, ESD could be used as the primary treatment. However, TEM may be more effective if supported by economic conditions and hospital facility. With respect to R-NENs <16 mm with low malignant potential, EMRL could be used as the primary treatment. In regard to R-NENs <10 mm with low malignant potential, EMRL, EMRC, and ESD could be used as the primary treatment. However, EMRL and EMRC might be better when operational difficulties and economic conditions were considered.

Endoscopic treatments for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR), EMR with a transparent cap, EMR using a ligation device (EMR-L), EMR after circumferential precutting (EMR-P), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been used for resecting rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, there is no consensus regarding which is the best treatment. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the aforementioned 5 techniques for resecting r-NETs by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to include relevant studies published from inception to September 1, 2023. The en bloc resection rate, histologic complete resection rate, positive lateral margin rate, positive vertical margin rate, adverse events rate, and procedure time were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies with a total of 2112 r-NETs were included, and the mean diameter of tumors was 6.24 mm. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that EMR-L and ESD had higher en bloc resection and histologic complete resection rates and lower positive vertical margin rate than those of cEMR in resecting r-NETs. Compared with ESD, EMR-L and EMR-P achieved similar resection rates and significantly shortened the procedure time without increasing adverse events. The network meta-analysis evaluated the surface under the cumulative ranking curves and revealed that EMR-L was the best modality for treating r-NETs considering the comprehensive results of the en bloc resection rate, histologic complete resection rate, positive lateral margin rate, positive vertical margin rate, adverse events rate, and procedure time.

CONCLUSION

EMR-L should be recommended as the first-line endoscopic treatment for small r-NETs.

Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device for small rectal neuroendocrine tumor: study protocol of a multicenter open-label randomized control trial (BANDIT trial)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection is widely accepted as a local treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumors sized ≤ 10 mm. However, there is no consensus on the best method for the endoscopic resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors. As a simplified endoscopic procedure, endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) indicates a histologically complete resection rate comparable to that of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We hypothesized that ESMR-L than ESD would be preferred for rectal neuroendocrine tumors. Hence, this trial aimed to verify whether ESMR-L is non-inferior to ESD in terms of histologically complete resection rate.

METHODS

This is a prospective, open-label, multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial of two parallel groups, conducted at the Shizuoka Cancer Center and 31 other institutions in Japan. Patients with a lesion endoscopically diagnosed as a rectal neuroendocrine tumor ≤ 10 mm are eligible for inclusion. A total of 266 patients will be recruited and randomized to undergo either ESD or ESMR-L. The primary endpoint is the rate of en bloc resection with histologically tumor-free margins (R0 resection). Secondary endpoints include en bloc resection rate, procedure time, adverse events, hospitalization days, total devices and agents cost, adverse event rate between groups with and without resection site closure, outcomes between expert and non-expert endoscopists, and factors associated with R0 resection failure. The sample size is determined based on the assumption that the R0 resection rate will be 95.2% in the ESD group and 95.3% in the ESMR-L group, with a non-inferiority margin of 8%. With a one-sided significance level of 0.05 and a power of 80%, 226 participants are required. Assuming a dropout rate of 15%, 266 patients will be included in this study.

DISCUSSION

This is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing ESD and ESMR-L for the R0 resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors ≤ 10 mm. This will provide valuable information for standardizing endoscopic resection methods for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCTs042210124. Registered on Jan 6, 2022.

Endoscopic Management of Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours: An Overview of Proposed Resection and Ablation Techniques

A literature search of MEDLINE/PUBMED was conducted with the aim to highlight current endoscopic management of localised gastro-entero-pancreatic NETs. Relevant articles were identified through a manual search, and reference lists were reviewed for additional articles. The results of the research have been displayed in a narrative fashion to illustrate the actual state-of-the-art of endoscopic techniques in the treatment of NETs. Localised NETs of the stomach, duodenum and rectum can benefit from advanced endoscopic resection techniques (e.g., modified endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic full thickness resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection) according to centre expertise. Radiofrequency thermal ablation can be proposed as an alternative to surgery in selected patients with localised pancreatic NETs.

Role of Advanced Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in the Comprehensive Management of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), also called neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), are relatively uncommon, heterogenous tumors primarily originating in the gastrointestinal tract. With the improvement in technology and increasing use of cross-sectional imaging and endoscopy, they are being discovered with increasing frequency. Although traditionally considered indolent tumors with good prognoses, some NENs exhibit aggressive behavior. Timely diagnosis, risk stratification, and management can often be a challenge. In general, small NENs without local invasion or lymphovascular involvement can often be managed using minimally invasive advanced endoscopic techniques, while larger lesions and those with evidence of lymphovascular invasion require surgery, systemic therapy, or a combination thereof. Ideal management requires a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the stage and grade of the tumor. With the recent advancements, a therapeutic advanced endoscopist can play a pivotal role in diagnosing, staging, and managing this rare condition. High-definition white light imaging and digital image enhancing technologies like narrow band imaging (NBI) in the newer endoscopes have improved the diagnostic accuracy of traditional endoscopy. The refinement of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) over the past decade has revolutionized the role of endoscopy in diagnosing and managing various pathologies, including NENs. In addition to EUS-directed diagnostic biopsies, it also offers the ability to precisely assess the depth of invasion and lymphovascular involvement and thus stage NENs accurately. EUS-directed locoregional ablative therapies are increasingly recognized as highly effective, minimally invasive treatment modalities for NENs, particularly pancreatic NENs. Advanced endoscopic resection techniques like endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have been increasingly used over the past decade with excellent results in achieving curative resection of various early-stage gastrointestinal luminal lesions including NENs. In this article, we aim to delineate NENs of the different segments of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract (esophagus, gastric, pancreatic, and small and large intestine) and their management with emphasis on the endoscopic management of these tumors.

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal resection with ligation and endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A multicenter retrospective study

Objectives

Endoscopic submucosal resection with band ligation (ESMR‐L) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are both standard endoscopic resection methods for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) <10 mm in size. However, there is no definitive consensus on which is better. Here, we compared the efficacy of ESMR‐L and ESD for small rectal NETs.

Methods

This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 205 patients with rectal NETs who underwent ESMR‐L or ESD. Treatment outcomes were compared by univariate analysis, multivariate analysis, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) using propensity scores. Subgroup analysis evaluated the impact of the endoscopist's experience on the technical outcome.

Results

Eighty‐nine patients were treated by ESMR‐L and 116 by ESD. The R0 resection rate was not significantly different between the two (90% vs. 92%, p = 0.73). The procedure time of ESMR‐L was significantly shorter than for ESD (17 min vs. 52 min, p < 0.01) and the hospitalization period was also significantly shorter (3 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.01). These results were confirmed by multivariate analysis and also after IPTW adjustment. The procedure time of ESD was significantly prolonged by a less‐experienced endoscopist (49 min vs. 70 min, p = 0.02), but that of ESMR‐L was not affected (17 min vs. 17 min, p = 0.27).

Conclusions

For small rectal NETs, both ESMR‐L and ESD showed similar high complete resection rates. However, considering the shorter procedure time and shorter hospitalization period, ESMR‐L is the more efficient treatment method, especially for less‐experienced endoscopists.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions

Subepithelial lesions (SEL) of the GI tract represent a mix of benign and potentially malignant entities including tumors, cysts, or extraluminal structures causing extrinsic compression of the gastrointestinal wall. SEL can occur anywhere along the GI tract and are frequently incidental findings encountered during endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging. This clinical guideline of the American College of Gastroenterology was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation process and is intended to suggest preferable approaches to a typical patient with a SEL based on the currently available published literature. Among the recommendations, we suggest endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with tissue acquisition to improve diagnostic accuracy in the identification of solid nonlipomatous SEL and EUS fine-needle biopsy alone or EUS fine-needle aspiration with rapid on-site evaluation sampling of solid SEL. There is insufficient evidence to recommend surveillance vs resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) <2 cm in size. Owing to their malignant potential, we suggest resection of gastric GIST >2 cm and all nongastric GIST. When exercising clinical judgment, particularly when statements are conditional suggestions and/or treatments pose significant risks, health-care providers should incorporate this guideline with patient-specific preferences, medical comorbidities, and overall health status to arrive at a patient-centered approach.

Rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: what the radiologists should know

Neuroendocrine neoplasms of the rectum (R-NENs) are rare; however, their incidence has increased almost threefold in the last few decades. Imaging of R-NENs includes two primary categories: anatomic/morphologic imaging comprised of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and functional/molecular imaging comprising of planar scintigraphy, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET). The management depends on stage, dimension, atypical features, histological grade, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Low-risk local R-NENs can be resected endoscopically, and high-risk or locally advanced neoplasms can be treated with radical surgery and lymphadenectomy and/or chemoradiation. The review article focuses on imaging illustrations and discusses applications of different imaging modalities in diagnosing and managing R-NENs.

EMR-P for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: is it a preferred treatment?

BACKGROUND

The selection of endoscopic treatments for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively compare the effectiveness and safety of precut endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR-P) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).

METHODS

Data from 98 patients with small rectal NETs who were hospitalized at Shenzhen Second People's Hospital between August 2014 and November 2021 were collected. The en bloc resection rate, pathological complete resection rate, radical resection rate, operation time, adverse event rate and hospital stay were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The operation time in the EMR-P group was significantly shorter than that in the ESD group. The median hospital stay in the EMR-P group was also significantly shorter than that in the ESD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the en bloc resection, complete resection or radical resection rates. There was also no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The delayed bleeding and delayed perforation rates of the two groups were improved after conservative treatment without surgery. There was no significant difference in the rate of positive vertical margins and horizontal margins between the EMR-P group and the ESD group. No local recurrence or metastasis was found during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

EMR-P is an effective and safe endoscopic treatment for rectal NETs with a diameter of less than 10 mm. EMR-P is a significantly shorter procedure and requires a shorter hospital stay than ESD. EMR-P does not increase the cut margin positivity rate.

Prognosis of incompletely resected small rectal neuroendocrine tumor using endoscope without additional treatment

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NET)s has markedly increased due to the widespread use of screening colonoscopy. However, many patients are referred from local clinics after undergoing conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for polyps without perceived NET, with a pathological report of incomplete resection. We evaluated the prognosis of incompletely resected small rectal NET without additional endoscopic resection for small rectal NET less than 10 mm in diameter present within the submucosal layer showing good prognosis, due to its rare metastatic potential.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients from 2008 to 2018 at a single center who had had small rectal NET (located in the rectum from the anal verge to 20 cm in proximity) and had undergone 'incomplete resection' using endoscopy with a positive deep margin or with a very small safe deep margin (< 100 um). A small rectal NET was defined as a tumor ≤ 10 mm in diameter, without lymph node nor distant metastasis, and with low grade (G1) according to the WHO grading system.

RESULTS

Of 267 patients who were diagnosed with small rectal NET, 77 were diagnosed with incomplete resection or possible remnant NET. Of those, 55 patients (55/77, 71.4%) were referred from local clinics post EMR diagnosed as polyps. The rate of histologically incomplete resection was highest in endoscopic submucosal dissection (11/21, 52.4%) and lowest in surgical resection (0/9, 0%), while endoscopic submucosal resection with band ligation showed an incomplete resection rate of 4.4% (5/113). After exclusion of 36 patients, namely 21 patients had undergone additional surgical (n = 6) or endoscopic (n = 15) resection and 25 patients who were lost during the follow-up period of 2 years, 31 patients had undergone surveillance with endoscopic evaluation or either a biopsy or radiological evaluation for distant metastasis during a median follow-up duration of 2 years. None of the incompletely resected small rectal NET patients showed local or distant metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Incomplete resection of small rectal NET with G1 grade has a good prognosis without additional treatment.

Current updates and future directions in diagnosis and management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms are a heterogenous group of rare neoplasms that are increasingly being discovered, often incidentally, throughout the gastrointestinal tract with varying degrees of activity and malignant potential. Confusing nomenclature has added to the complexity of managing these lesions. The term carcinoid tumor and embryonic classification have been replaced with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm, which includes gastrointestinal neuroendocrine and pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. A comprehensive multidisciplinary approach is important for clinicians to diagnose, stage and manage these lesions. While histological diagnosis is the gold standard, recent advancements in endoscopy, conventional imaging, functional imaging, and serum biomarkers complement histology for tailoring specific treatment options. In light of developing technology, our review sets out to characterize diagnostic and therapeutic advancements for managing gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, including innovations in radiolabeled peptide imaging, circulating biomarkers, and endoscopic treatment approaches adapted to different locations throughout the gastrointestinal system.

Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors

Background and Study Aims

The resection strategy for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NET) < 10 mm is not uniform. We compared the utility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) to endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) to resect rectal NETs.

Patients and Methods

Patients with rectal NET < 10 mm treated with UEMR or ESMR-L were included. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Thirty-two patients were divided into a UEMR group (n = 7) and an ESMR-L group (n = 25). Histopathological diagnosis of NET by biopsy was known before resection in 43% (3/7) in the UEMR group and 68% (17/25) in the ESMR-L group, (p = 0.379). UEMR was performed on an outpatient basis for all patients, and 92% of ESMR-L (23/25) were performed as inpatient procedures (p < 0.001). The procedure time was significantly shorter in the UEMR group than in the ESMR-L group [median (IQR), min, 6 (5–8) vs. 12 (9–14), p = 0.002]. En bloc resection and R0 resection rates were 100% in both groups. Pathological evaluations were predominantly NET G1 in both groups (UEMR: 7/7, 100% and ESMR-L: 23/25, 92%). Two patients in the ESMR-L group developed delayed bleeding, controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Device costs were significantly higher in the ESMR-L group than the UEMR group by approximately US$180 [median (IQR), $90.45 (83.64–108.41) vs. $274.73 (265.86–292.45), P < 0.001].

Conclusion

UEMR results in similar resection quality with shorter procedure time and lower costs compared to ESMR-L. We recommend UEMR for the resection of rectal NET < 10 mm.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: Advantages of endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device compared to conventional EMR and ESD

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors: Current advances in management, treatment, and surveillance

Rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (r-NENs) are considered among the most frequent digestive NENs, together with small bowel NENs. Their incidence has increased over the past few years, and this is probably due to the widespread use of endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer and the advanced endoscopic procedures available nowadays. According to the current European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines, well-differentiated r-NENs smaller than 10 mm should be endoscopically removed in view of their low risk of local and distant invasion. R-NENs larger than 20 mm are candidates for surgical resection because of their high risk of distant spreading and the involvement of the muscularis propria. There is an area of uncertainty regarding tumors between 10 and 20 mm, in which the metastatic risk is intermediate and the endoscopic treatment can be challenging. Once removed, the indications for surveillance are scarce and poorly codified by international guidelines, therefore in this paper, a possible algorithm is proposed.

Prognosis of rectal neuroendocrine tumors after endoscopic resection: a single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of endoscopic resection in patients with rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) which are less than 20 mm in diameter remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and outcomes of different types of endoscopic resection in patients with NETs.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis and follow-up on 98 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for rectal NETs between August 2010 and October 2019 at Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, China. The lesions were preoperatively classified according to their endoscopic morphology and measured by endoscopic ultrasound. Patients were divided into modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) groups depending on the endoscopic treatment they received. The en bloc resection rate, histopathological complete resection rate, and the complication rate of the 2 groups were evaluated after the operation. The risk factors for incomplete resection were also analyzed.

RESULTS

The average diameter of the 98 NETs was 6.29±2.90 mm (range, 2-15 mm). The en bloc resection rate of the modified EMR and ESD treatment groups was 97.2% (35/36) and 100% (62/62), respectively. The histopathological complete resection rate was 86.1% (31/36) and 87.1% (54/62), respectively. No tumor recurrence or tumor-related death occurred. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of histopathological complete resection, perforation, or delayed hemorrhage between the 2 groups (P>0.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the depth of tumor invasion (P=0.007) and tumor diameter (P<0.001) were independent risk factors for histopathological complete resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Modified EMR and ESD are safe and effective endoscopic approaches for the resection of rectal NETs ≤15 mm in diameter. Endoscopic resection requires a comprehensive preoperative evaluation of risk factors including the depth of tumor invasion and tumor diameter.

Modified endoscopic mucosal resection techniques for treating precancerous colorectal lesions

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a technique allowing efficacious and minimally invasive resection of precancerous lesions across the entire gastrointestinal tract. However, conventional EMR, involving injection of fluid into the submucosal space, is imperfect, given the high rate of recurrence of post-endoscopic resection adenoma, especially after piecemeal resection. In light of these observations, modifications of the technique have been proposed to overcome the weakness of conventional EMR. Some of them were designed to maximize the chance of en bloc resection—cap-assisted EMR, underwater EMR, tip-in EMR, precutting, assisted by ligation device—while others were designed to minimize the complications (cold EMR). In this review, we present their modes of action and summarize the evidence regarding their efficacy and safety.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal carcinoid tumor. A meta-analysis and meta-regression with single-arm analysis

OBJECTIVE

As there has been so far no consensus on the best endoscopic resection technique, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for treating rectal carcinoid tumors.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for articles on the treatment of rectal carcinoid tumors using ESD vs EMR published up to October 2020 for outcomes including en bloc and complete resection, margin involvement, procedure time, requirement for additional surgery, bleeding, perforation and recurrence. Risk ratio and weighted mean differences were used for a DerSimonian and Laird random effects pairwise meta-analysis. Single-arm meta-analyses of proportions and random effects meta-regression analysis were also conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies involving 1360 rectal carcinoid tumors were included, in which 655 and 705 rectal carcinoid tumors were resected with ESD and EMR, respectively. The resection efficacy of ESD was comparable to that of EMR for tumors <10 mm. However, there were a significantly higher complete resection rate, and lower rates of vertical margin involvement and requirement for additional surgery using ESD than using EMR for tumors ≤20 mm. ESD had a longer procedure time and an increased likelihood of bleeding than EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD is more effective in providing a curative treatment for rectal carcinoid tumors ≤20 mm in size as ESD can achieve a higher complete resection rate with lower vertical margin involvement than EMR. While they are suitable for treating rectal carcinoid tumors <10 mm as both techniques provide similar efficacy.

Endoscopic resection using an over-the-scope clip for duodenal neuroendocrine tumors

Background and study aims  Endoscopic resection of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNETs) remains controversial, and its indications are still unclear. This study aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of a newly developed endoscopic muscularis resection (EMR) method that utilizes an over-the-scope clip (OTSC), termed EMRO, for treating DNETs. Patients and methods  In total, 13 consecutive patients with 14 small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs who underwent EMRO from September 2017 to March 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. EMRO was performed by a single experienced endoscopist. Patients' characteristics and treatment outcomes were assessed. Results  The En bloc and R0 resection rates were 100 % (14/14) and 92.9 % (13/14), respectively. The median pathological resected specimen size was 10 mm, with a median pathological resected tumor size of 6 mm. During the EMRO procedure, there was no occurrence of misplacement of the OTSC to the target lesion. With respect to the pathological resection depth, nine cases (64.3 %) and five cases (35.7 %) were categorized as deep submucosal resection and muscularis resection, respectively, whereas no case was categorized as full-thickness resection. There were no intraoperative or delayed perforations. However, delayed bleeding occurred in two cases. At a median follow-up of 12 months (range 7-36) after EMRO, there was no incidence of local recurrence. At the first follow-up endoscopy performed at 6 months after EMRO, the OTSC was retained in place in two of 14 DNETs (14.3 %). Conclusions  EMRO can be performed safely, by an experienced endoscopist, for small (≤ 10 mm) DNETs.

Diagnosis and Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETs)

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare, with an incidence of 0.17%, but they represent 12% to 27% of all NETs and 20% of gastrointestinal NETs. Although rectal NETs are uncommon tumors, their incidence has increased over the past few years, and this is probably due to the improvement in detection rates made by advanced endoscopic procedures. The biological behavior of rectal NETs may be different: factors predicting the risk of metastases have been identified, such as size and grade of differentiation. The tendency for metastatic diffusion generally depends on the tumor size, muscular and lymphovascular infiltration, and histopathological differentiation. According to the current European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines, tumors that are smaller than 10 mm and well differentiated are thought to have a low risk of lymphovascular invasion, and they should be completely removed endoscopically. Rectal NETs larger than 20 mm have a higher risk of involvement of muscularis propria and high metastatic risk and are candidates for surgical resection. There is controversy over rectal NETs of intermediate size, 10–19 mm, where the metastatic risk is considered to be 10–15%: assessment of tumors endoscopically and by endoanal ultrasound should guide treatment in these cases towards endoscopic, transanal, or surgical resection.

Resectability of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Using Endoscopic Mucosal Resection with a Ligation Band Device and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Background

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) < 10 mm in diameter, limited to the submucosa without local or distant metastasis, can be treated endoscopically. Endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation band device (EMR-L) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been employed to resect rectal NETs. We evaluated and compared the clinical outcomes of EMR-L and ESD for endoscopic resection of rectal NETs G1 < 10 mm in diameter.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 82 rectal NETs in 82 patients who underwent either EMR-L or ESD. Therapeutic outcomes (en bloc resection and complete resection rates), procedure time, and procedure-related adverse events were evaluated. Additionally, we measured the distance of the lateral and vertical margins from the border of the tumor in pathologic specimens and compared the resectability between EMR-L and ESD.

Results

Sixty-six lesions were treated using EMR-L and 16 using ESD. En bloc resection was achieved in all patients. The complete resection rate with EMR-L was significantly higher than that with ESD (95.5% vs.75.0%, p = 0.025). The prevalence of vertical margin involvement was significantly higher in the ESD group than in the EMR-L group (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.036), and ESD was more time consuming than EMR-L (24.21 ± 12.18 vs. 7.05 ± 4.53 min, p < 0.001). The lateral and vertical margins were more distant in the EMR-L group than in the ESD group (lateral margin distance, 1661 ± 849 vs. 1514 ± 948 μm; vertical margin distance, 277 ± 308 vs. 202 ± 171 μm).

Conclusions

EMR-L is more favorable for small rectal NETs with respect to therapeutic outcomes, procedure time, and technical difficulties. Additionally, EMR-L enables achievement of sufficient vertical margin distances.

Endoscopic management of 345 small rectal neuroendocrine tumours: A national study from the French group of endocrine tumours (GTE)

Introduction

Small rectal neuroendocrine tumours are good candidates for endoscopic resection provided that complete pathological resection (R0) is obtained and their risk of metastatic progression is low. We conducted a large multicentre nationwide study to evaluate the outcomes of the management of non-metastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumours ≤2 cm diagnosed endoscopically.

Patients and methods

The medical records, the endoscopic and pathological findings of patients with non-metastatic rectal neuroendocrine tumours ≤2 cm managed from January 2000-June 2018 in 16 French hospitals, were retrospectively analysed. The primary objective was to describe the proportion of R0 endoscopic resections.

Results

A total of 329 patients with 345 rectal neuroendocrine tumours were included, 330 (96%) tumours were managed by local treatments: 287 by endoscopy only and 43 by endoscopy followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The final endoscopic R0 rate was 134/345 (39%), which improved from the first endoscopy (54/225, 24%), to the second (60/100, 60%) and the third endoscopy (20/26, 77%). R0 was associated with endoscopic technique (90% for advanced techniques, 40% for mucosectomy and 17% for polypectomy), but not with tumour or patient characteristics. Twenty patients had metastatic disease, which was associated with tumour size ≥10 mm (odds ratio: 9.1, 95% confidence interval (3.5-23.5)), tumour grade G2-G3 (odds ratio: 4.2, (1.5-11.7)), the presence of muscular (odds ratio: ∞, (11.9-∞)) and lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio: 57.2, (5.6-578.9)).

Conclusions

The resection of small rectal neuroendocrine tumours often requires multiple procedures. Training of endoscopists is necessary in order to better recognise these tumours and to perform the appropriate resection technique.

Endoscopic submucosal resection with an endoscopic variceal ligation device for the treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection is recommended for rectal neuroendocrine tumors < 1 cm in diameter; the three techniques (mucosal resection, submucosal dissection, and mucosal resection with variceal ligation device) of endoscopic resection of neuroendocrine tumor were reported; however, the optimal endoscopic technique remains unclear.

PURPOSE

We compared the efficacy and safety of three endoscopic rectal neuroendocrine tumor resection methods.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 52 patients with rectal neuroendocrine tumors treated by endoscopy at Aichi Medical University Hospital and Nagoya City University Hospital between May 2003 and June 2017. We compared clinical outcomes in three groups based on the endoscopic treatment method.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients underwent endoscopic rectal neuroendocrine tumor treatment (mucosal resection, 14; submucosal dissection, 19; mucosal resection with an endoscopic variceal ligation device, 19). In the endoscopic mucosal resection, submucosal dissection, and mucosal resection with variceal ligation device groups, R0 resection occurred in 50.0, 94.7, and 89.5%, respectively (mucosal resection vs. mucosal resection with variceal ligation device, p < 0.05; mucosal resection vs. submucosal dissection, p < 0.01), while the median procedure times were 6.5, 43, and 6.0 min, respectively (submucosal dissection vs. mucosal resection with variceal ligation device procedure times, p < 0.01; mucosal resection vs. submucosal resection procedure times, p < 0.01). Postoperative bleeding occurred after endoscopic mucosal resection (1/14) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (4/19), but not after endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation device.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic mucosal resection with an endoscopic variceal ligation device was a safe, effective treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

Endoscopic mucosal resection with suction vs. endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There are no guidelines or consensus on the optimal treatment measures for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) at present. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with suction and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the small rectal NETs.

METHODS

The literature searches were conducted using Pubmed and Embase databases, and then a meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was complete resection rate, and the secondary outcomes were complication rate, procedure time, and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with 823 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The overall complete resection rates in EMR with suction and ESD procedure were 93.65% (472/504) and 84.08% (243/289), respectively. The pooled analysis showed that EMR with suction could achieve a higher complete resection rate than ESD with significance (OR: 4.08, 95% CI: 2.42-6.88, p < .00001) when the outlier study was excluded, and procedure time was significantly shorter in the EMR with suction group than in the ESD group (SMD: -1.59, 95% CI: -2.27 to -0.90, p < .00001). Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall complication rate (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.28-1.14, p = .11) and overall recurrence rate (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.11-5.07, I²=48%) between EMR with suction and ESD group.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis mostly based on retrospective studies show that EMR with suction is superior to ESD for small rectal NETs (≤10 mm) with higher complete resection rate, shorter procedure time, and similar overall complication rate and recurrence.

Neuroendocrine neoplasms of rectum: A management update

The estimated annual incidence of R-NENs is 1.04 per 100,000 persons although the real incidence may be underestimated, as not all R-NEN are systematically reported in registers. Also the prevalence has increased substantially, reflecting the rising incidence and indolent nature of R-NENs, showing the highest prevalence increase among all site of origin of NENs. The size of the tumor reveals the behavior of R-NENs where the risk for metastatic spread increases for lesions > 10 mm. Applying the WHO 2010 grading system to whole NENs originating in the gastroenteropancreatic system, R-NENs are classified as Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors (WD-NET), which contain NET G1 and NET G2, and Poorly-Differentiated Carcinomas (PD-NEC) enclosing only G3 neoplasms for which the term carcinoma is applied. The treatment is endoscopic resection in most cases: conventional polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for smaller lesions or endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L), cap-assisted EMR (EMR-C) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However it is important to know when the endoscopic treatment is not enough, and surgical treatment is indicated, or when the latter could be unnecessary. For PD-NECs, it has recently been demonstrated that chemoradiotherapy is associated with a similar long-term survival to that obtained with surgery. As well, new targeted-agents chemotherapy may be indicated for metastatic WD-NETs.

Comparison of endoscopic therapies for rectal carcinoid tumors: Endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential incision versus endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Although various endoscopic resection techniques have been established for rectal carcinoid tumors, there remains controversy regarding the best endoscopic treatment modality for these tumors. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of EMR with circumferential incision (EMR-CI) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for endoscopic resection of rectal carcinoid tumors.

METHODS

From March 2012 to June 2016, 66 rectal carcinoid tumors in 66 patients were resected by using EMR-CI (n=30) or ESD (n=36). The rates of both en bloc resection and complete resection, procedure time, procedure-related complications, and local or metastatic recurrence were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The en bloc resection rate was 96.7% (29/30) and 100% (36/36) for EMR-CI and ESD groups, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.455). The complete resection rate of the ESD group was 97.2% (35/36) and significantly higher than 76.7% (23/30) of the EMR-CI group (P=0.030). The mean procedure time of the ESD group was 20.44±6.64minutes, which was significantly longer than that of the EMR-CI group at 8.47±3.40minutes (P<0.001). The complication rates for ESD and EMR-CI did not differ significantly (0% for EMR-CI vs. 2.8% for ESD, P=1.000). No local or metastatic recurrence was found in either group during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that ESD may be a safe, effective, and feasible endoscopic technique for removing rectal carcinoid tumors. ESD showed a similar safety profile and superior efficacy to EMR-CI.

Diagnosis and Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors

The incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has increased by almost ten-fold over the past 30 years. There has been a heightened awareness of the malignant potential of rectal NETs. Fortunately, many rectal NETs are discovered at earlier stages due to colon cancer screening programs. Endoscopic ultrasound is useful in assessing both residual tumor burden after retrospective diagnosis and tumor characteristics to help guide subsequent management. Current guidelines suggest endoscopic resection of rectal NETs ≤10 mm as a safe therapeutic option given their low risk of metastasis. Although a number of endoscopic interventions exist, the best technique for resection has not been identified. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has high complete and en-bloc resection rates, but also an increased risk of complications including perforation. In addition, ESD is only performed at tertiary centers by experienced advanced endoscopists. Endoscopic mucosal resection has been shown to have variable complete resection rates, but modifications to the technique such as the addition of band ligation have improved outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to further compare the available endoscopic interventions, and to elucidate the most appropriate course of management of rectal NETs.