374
Views
30
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Endoscopic mucosal resection with suction vs. endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a meta-analysis

, , &
Pages 1139-1145 | Received 13 May 2018, Accepted 03 Jul 2018, Published online: 07 Sep 2018
 

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.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by Key research and development plan of Shandong Province (No.2016GSF201002); Ji'nan clinical medical science and technology innovation plan (No.201602166).

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 336.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.