Background: Evidence that comprehensively compares the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for rectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) is limited.
Methods: Between January 2009 and June 2018, 143 rectal LSTs in 143 patients who had undergone either ESD (n = 84) or ESTD (n = 59) were included in the study. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed, and 50 pairs were selected. The data on patient demographics, treatment information, pathology reports, adverse events and follow-up were collected.
Results: Before PSM, the median specimen area was significantly larger in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (12.56 cm2 vs. 6.32 cm2, respectively; p < 0.001). The median dissection speed was significantly higher in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (24.53 mm2/min vs. 15.16 mm2/min, respectively; p < 0.001). After PSM, the median dissection speed was significantly higher in the ESTD group than in the ESD group (23.80 mm2/min vs. 17.12 mm2/min, respectively; p < 0.001). In multiple linear regression analysis, significant factors related to a higher dissection speed were the treatment method of ESTD (p < 0.001) and larger specimen area (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: ESTD appears to be a safe and effective method to treat rectal LSTs. Compared with ESD, ESTD appears to achieve a higher dissection speed for rectal LSTs.
Keywords: Endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection; Laterally spreading tumors; Rectum.