Background and study aims: Rectal carcinoid tumors are often found incidentally during screening colonoscopy and can be resected using various endoscopic techniques. This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for rectal carcinoid tumors.
Patients and methods: Between January 2003 and June 2009, 74 patients (74 lesions) underwent either EMR (n = 28) or ESD (n = 46) for rectal carcinoid tumors. The rate of endoscopic complete resection, pathological complete resection, procedure complications, and tumor recurrence were analyzed retrospectively.
Results: The endoscopic complete resection rate was significantly higher in the ESD group (46 lesions, 100 %) compared with the EMR group (25 lesions, 89.3 %) ( P = 0.049). The pathological complete resection rate was higher in the ESD group (38 lesions, 82.6 %) compared with the EMR group (18 lesions, 64.3 %); however, this difference was borderline significant ( P = 0.067). Overall complication rate was not significantly different between the EMR group (3.6 %) and the ESD group (6.3 %). There was one case of remnant lesion in the EMR group, which was managed by ESD, and no recurrence has been detected in either the EMR or ESD groups.
Conclusion: This study suggests that ESD might be a feasible treatment technique for small rectal carcinoid tumors. It showed superior efficacy and comparable safety to EMR.
(c) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart . New York.