DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Endoscopic Resection for Rectal Carcinoid Tumors: Comparision of Polypectomy and Endoscopic Submucosal Resection with Band Ligation

  • Lee, Sang-Heon (Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Seun-Ja (Department of Internal Medicine, Kosin University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hyung-Hun (Department of Internal Medicine, Kosin University College of Medicine) ;
  • Ok, Kyung-Sun (Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Ji-Hyun (Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jee, Sam-Ryong (Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Seol, Sang-Young (Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Bo-Mi (Department of Pathology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2011.04.09
  • 심사 : 2012.01.10
  • 발행 : 2012.03.30

초록

Background/Aims: Rectal carcinoid tumors, at diagnosis, are as small as 10 mm or less in about 80% of patients. These tumors are generally removed by endoscopic resection. The aim of this study was to compare treatment efficacy and safety between endoscopic submucosal resection with band ligation (ESMR-L) and conventional polypectomy. Methods: Between January 2005 and September 2010, a total of 88 patients, who visited at Busan Paik Hospital and Kosin University Gospel Hospital for endoscopic resection of rectal carcinoid, were reviewed, retrospectively. Results: Thirty-three cases were treated by ESMR-L, and 55 cases by conventional polypectomy. There were no significant difference in the size of tumor between ESMR-L group and polypectomy group (6.02${\pm}$2.36 vs. 6.49${\pm}$3.24 mm, p=0.474). The rate of positive resection margin was significantly lower in ESMR-L group (2/33, 6.1%) than in polypectomy group (19/55, 34.5%; p=0.002). The rate of positive vertical resection margin, among others, was markedly lower in ESMR-L group (1/33, 3.0%) compared to polypectomy group (19/55, 34.5%; p<0.001). Conclusions: ESMR-L, rather than conventional polypectomy, is a useful treatment option for removal of rectal carcinoid tumors less than 10 mm in diameter.

키워드

피인용 문헌

  1. Tips and Tricks for Better Endoscopic Treatment of Colorectal Tumors: Usefulness of Cap and Band in Colorectal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vol.46, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2013.46.5.492
  2. Which endoscopic treatment is the best for small rectal carcinoid tumors? vol.5, pp.10, 2012, https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v5.i10.487
  3. Diagnosis and Treatment of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumor vol.87, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3904/kjm.2014.87.4.415
  4. A tailored approach for endoscopic treatment of small rectal neuroendocrine tumor vol.28, pp.10, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3555-1
  5. Rare Tumors of the Rectum. Narrative Review vol.92, pp.9, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2013.06.009
  6. Dilemmas in Endoscopic Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Case-Based Discussion vol.2015, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/539861
  7. Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors According to the Pathologic Status After Initial Endoscopic Resection: A KASID Multicenter Study vol.111, pp.9, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2016.267
  8. Analysis of different endoscopic methods for resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A 10-year experience at a secondary care hospital vol.5, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/aid2.13068
  9. Rectal carcinoid tumor: diagnosis and management vol.39, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcol.2019.02.002
  10. Endoscopic, transanal, laparoscopic, and transabdominal management of rectal neuroendocrine tumors vol.33, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2019.101293
  11. Recurrence pattern and surveillance strategy for rectal neuroendocrine tumors after endoscopic resection vol.36, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15231