Premium
EFFICACY OF ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL RESECTION WITH A LIGATION DEVICE FOR REMOVING SMALL RECTAL CARCINOID TUMOR COMPARED WITH ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION: ANALYSIS OF 100 CASES
Author(s) -
KIM HYUNG HUN,
PARK SEUN JA,
LEE SANG HEON,
PARK HEE UG,
SONG CHUL SOO,
PARK MOO IN,
MOON WON
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
digestive endoscopy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.5
H-Index - 56
eISSN - 1443-1661
pISSN - 0915-5635
DOI - 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01190.x
Subject(s) - medicine , lymphovascular invasion , endoscopic mucosal resection , ligation , carcinoid tumors , resection , surgery , resection margin , radiology , cancer , metastasis
Aim Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of carcinoid tumors is often associated with involvement of the resection margin, which necessitates further intervention. Endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR‐L) is a novel technique for the removal of carcinoid tumors. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical usefulness of endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device with that of EMR for the complete resection of rectal carcinoid tumors. Methods Between January 2001 and October 2010, a total of 100 patients with 100 rectal carcinoid tumors that were estimated to be 10 mm or less in diameter and that were resected either using ESMR‐L or EMR were recruited for this study. The complete resection rate and complications associated with these two procedures were analyzed. Results Forty‐five out of 100 lesions were resected using ESMR‐L, and 55 lesions were resected using EMR. Histopathologically, all tumors were free from lymphovascular and perineural invasion. The overall ESMR‐L complete resection rate was higher than that of EMR (93.3% vs 65.5%, respectively, P = 0.001). Furthermore, the location of the tumors had no influence on the complete resection rate when ESMR‐L was carried out, in contrast to the results of EMR. The procedure‐related variables of procedure time and complication rate were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion ESMR‐L is a significantly superior modality to EMR for the complete removal of small rectal carcinoid tumors that are 10 mm or less in diameter.