Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Endoscopic mucosal resection using anchored snare Tip-in versus precut technique for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors.
Hong, Seung Wook; Yang, Dong-Hoon; Lee, Yoo Jin; Baek, Dong Hoon; Chun, Jaeyoung; Kim, Hyun Gun; Kim, Sung Joo; Hong, Seung-Mo; Myung, Dae-Seong.
Afiliação
  • Hong SW; Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Seoul, Korea.
  • Yang DH; Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Seoul, Korea.
  • Lee YJ; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
  • Baek DH; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
  • Chun J; Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Kim HG; Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Kim SJ; Department of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Hong SM; Department of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Myung DS; Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National Medical School, Gwangju, Korea.
Korean J Intern Med ; 39(2): 238-247, 2024 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38062724
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/

AIMS:

Small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated with modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, an optimal EMR method remains to be established. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR versus precut EMR (EMR-P) for treating rectal NETs.

METHODS:

This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with rectal NETs of < 10 mm in diameter. The patients were randomly assigned to EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups in a 11 ratio. Primary outcome was margin-negative (R0) resection rate between the two methods, with a noninferiority margin of 10%.

RESULTS:

Seventy-five NETs in 73 patients, including 64 eligible lesions (32 lesions in each, EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups), were evaluated. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, R0 resection rates of the EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups were 96.9% and 90.6%, respectively, which did not demonstrate non-inferiority (risk difference, -6.3 [95% confidence interval -18.0 to 5.5]). Resection time in the EMR-P group was longer than that in the Tip-in EMR group (p < 0.001). One case of intraprocedural bleeding was reported in each group.

CONCLUSION:

We did not demonstrate the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR compared to EMR-P for treating small rectal NETs. However, the R0 resection rates for both techniques were high enough for clinical application.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Retais / Tumores Neuroendócrinos / Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Retais / Tumores Neuroendócrinos / Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article