366
Views
27
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Endoscopic treatments for rectal neuroendocrine tumors smaller than 16 mm: a meta-analysis

, , &
Pages 1345-1353 | Received 30 Apr 2016, Accepted 06 Jun 2016, Published online: 01 Jul 2016
 

Abstract

Objective: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), including conventional EMR (c-EMR) and modified EMR (m-EMR), was applied to remove small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). We aim to evaluate treatment outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), m-EMR and c-EMR for rectal NETs <16 mm.

Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library and Elsevier Science Direct were searched to identify eligible articles. After quality assessment and data extraction, meta-analysis was performed. The main outcomes were complete resection rate, overall complication rate, procedure time and local recurrence rate.

Results: Compared with c-EMR, ESD could achieve higher complete resection rate (OR = 4.38, 95%CI: 2.43–7.91, p < 0.00001) without increasing overall complication rates (OR = 2.21, 95%CI: 0.56–8.70, p = 0.25). However, ESD was more time-consuming than c-EMR (MD = 6.72, 95%CI: 5.84–7.60, p < 0.00001). Compared with m-EMR, ESD did not differ from m-EMR in complete resection and overall complication rates (OR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.51–1.27, p = 0.34; OR = 1.91, 95%CI: 0.75–4.86, p = 0.18, respectively). However, ESD was more time-consuming than m-EMR (MD = 12.21, 95%CI: 7.78–16.64, p < 0.00001). Compared with c-EMR, m-EMR could achieve higher complete resection rate (OR = 4.23, 95%CI: 2.39–7.50, p < 0.00001) without increasing overall complication rate (OR = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.35–3.32, p = 0.90). Moreover, m-EMR was not time-consuming than c-EMR (MD = 2.01, 95%CI: −0.37–4.40, p= 0.10). The local recurrence rate was 0.84% (9/1067) during follow-up.

Conclusions: Both ESD and m-EMR have great advantages over c-EMR in complete resection rate without increasing safety concern while m-EMR shares similar outcomes with ESD for rectal NETs <16 mm. The results should be confirmed by well-designed, multicenter, randomized controlled trials with large samples and long-term follow-ups from more countries.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.