![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective: There are no guidelines or consensus on the optimal treatment measures for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) at present. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with suction and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the small rectal NETs.
Methods: The literature searches were conducted using Pubmed and Embase databases, and then a meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was complete resection rate, and the secondary outcomes were complication rate, procedure time, and recurrence rate.
Results: Fourteen studies with 823 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The overall complete resection rates in EMR with suction and ESD procedure were 93.65% (472/504) and 84.08% (243/289), respectively. The pooled analysis showed that EMR with suction could achieve a higher complete resection rate than ESD with significance (OR: 4.08, 95% CI: 2.42–6.88, p < .00001) when the outlier study was excluded, and procedure time was significantly shorter in the EMR with suction group than in the ESD group (SMD: −1.59, 95% CI: −2.27 to −0.90, p < .00001). Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall complication rate (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.28–1.14, p = .11) and overall recurrence rate (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.11–5.07, I2=48%) between EMR with suction and ESD group.
Conclusions: The present meta-analysis mostly based on retrospective studies show that EMR with suction is superior to ESD for small rectal NETs (≤10 mm) with higher complete resection rate, shorter procedure time, and similar overall complication rate and recurrence.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.