内镜下粘膜夹层与经肛门内镜显微手术治疗一期直肠神经内分泌肿瘤的比较。

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Jun Weng, Jun Chi, Yan-Hua Lv, Ruo-Bing Chen, Guo-Liang Xu, Xian-Feng Xia, Kun-Hao Bai
{"title":"内镜下粘膜夹层与经肛门内镜显微手术治疗一期直肠神经内分泌肿瘤的比较。","authors":"Jun Weng, Jun Chi, Yan-Hua Lv, Ruo-Bing Chen, Guo-Liang Xu, Xian-Feng Xia, Kun-Hao Bai","doi":"10.4253/wjge.v17.i2.99906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stage 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are best treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for local resection.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate the safety and efficacy of ESD and TEM for local resection of stage 1 rectal NETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational analysis included patients with clinical stage 1 rectal NETs (cT1N0M0, less than 20 mm) who underwent ESD or TEM. The ESD and TEM groups were matched to ensure that they had comparable lesion sizes, lesion locations, and pathological grades. We assessed the differences between groups in terms of <i>en bloc</i> resection rate, R0 resection rate, adverse event rate, recurrence rate, and hospital stay and cost.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally, 128 Lesions (ESD = 84; TEM = 44) were included, with 58 Lesions within the matched groups (ESD = 29; TEM = 29). Both the ESD and TEM groups had identical <i>en bloc</i> resection (100.0% <i>vs</i> 100.0%, <i>P</i> = 1.000), R0 resection (82.8% <i>vs</i> 96.6%, <i>P</i> = 0.194), adverse event (0.0% <i>vs</i> 6.9%, <i>P</i> = 0.491), and recurrence (0.0% <i>vs</i> 3.4%, <i>P</i> = 1.000) rates. Nevertheless, the median hospital stay [ESD: 5.5 (4.5-6.0) <i>vs</i> TEM: 10.0 (7.0-12.0) days; <i>P</i> < 0.001], and cost [ESD: 11.6 (9.8-12.6) <i>vs</i> TEM: 20.9 (17.0-25.1) kilo-China Yuan, <i>P</i> < 0.001] were remarkably shorter and less for ESD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both ESD and TEM were well-tolerated and yielded favorable outcomes for the local removal of clinical stage 1 rectal NETs. ESD exhibits shorter hospital stay and fewer costs than TEM.</p>","PeriodicalId":23953,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":"17 2","pages":"99906"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843039/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for stage 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors.\",\"authors\":\"Jun Weng, Jun Chi, Yan-Hua Lv, Ruo-Bing Chen, Guo-Liang Xu, Xian-Feng Xia, Kun-Hao Bai\",\"doi\":\"10.4253/wjge.v17.i2.99906\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stage 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are best treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for local resection.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate the safety and efficacy of ESD and TEM for local resection of stage 1 rectal NETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational analysis included patients with clinical stage 1 rectal NETs (cT1N0M0, less than 20 mm) who underwent ESD or TEM. The ESD and TEM groups were matched to ensure that they had comparable lesion sizes, lesion locations, and pathological grades. We assessed the differences between groups in terms of <i>en bloc</i> resection rate, R0 resection rate, adverse event rate, recurrence rate, and hospital stay and cost.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally, 128 Lesions (ESD = 84; TEM = 44) were included, with 58 Lesions within the matched groups (ESD = 29; TEM = 29). Both the ESD and TEM groups had identical <i>en bloc</i> resection (100.0% <i>vs</i> 100.0%, <i>P</i> = 1.000), R0 resection (82.8% <i>vs</i> 96.6%, <i>P</i> = 0.194), adverse event (0.0% <i>vs</i> 6.9%, <i>P</i> = 0.491), and recurrence (0.0% <i>vs</i> 3.4%, <i>P</i> = 1.000) rates. Nevertheless, the median hospital stay [ESD: 5.5 (4.5-6.0) <i>vs</i> TEM: 10.0 (7.0-12.0) days; <i>P</i> < 0.001], and cost [ESD: 11.6 (9.8-12.6) <i>vs</i> TEM: 20.9 (17.0-25.1) kilo-China Yuan, <i>P</i> < 0.001] were remarkably shorter and less for ESD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both ESD and TEM were well-tolerated and yielded favorable outcomes for the local removal of clinical stage 1 rectal NETs. ESD exhibits shorter hospital stay and fewer costs than TEM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"99906\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843039/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v17.i2.99906\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v17.i2.99906","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:1期直肠神经内分泌肿瘤(NETs)的最佳治疗方法是内镜下粘膜剥离(ESD)或经肛门内镜显微手术(TEM)局部切除。目的:探讨ESD和TEM在一期直肠网状肿瘤局部切除术中的安全性和有效性。方法:回顾性观察分析包括临床1期直肠NETs (cT1N0M0,小于20 mm),接受ESD或TEM治疗的患者。将ESD组和TEM组进行匹配,以确保它们具有相似的病变大小、病变位置和病理分级。我们评估了两组在整体切除率、R0切除率、不良事件发生率、复发率、住院时间和费用方面的差异。结果:共128例病变(ESD = 84;TEM = 44例,匹配组58例(ESD = 29例;Tem = 29)。ESD组和TEM组的整体切除(100.0% vs 100.0%, P = 1.000)、R0切除(82.8% vs 96.6%, P = 0.194)、不良事件(0.0% vs 6.9%, P = 0.491)和复发率(0.0% vs 3.4%, P = 1.000)相同。然而,平均住院时间[ESD: 5.5 (4.5-6.0) vs TEM: 10.0(7.0-12.0)天;P < 0.001],成本[ESD: 11.6 (9.8-12.6) vs TEM: 20.9(17.0-25.1)千元,P < 0.001]明显更短,更少。结论:ESD和TEM对于临床1期直肠NETs的局部切除均具有良好的耐受性和良好的效果。与TEM相比,ESD的住院时间更短,费用更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for stage 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

Background: Stage 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are best treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for local resection.

Aim: To investigate the safety and efficacy of ESD and TEM for local resection of stage 1 rectal NETs.

Methods: This retrospective observational analysis included patients with clinical stage 1 rectal NETs (cT1N0M0, less than 20 mm) who underwent ESD or TEM. The ESD and TEM groups were matched to ensure that they had comparable lesion sizes, lesion locations, and pathological grades. We assessed the differences between groups in terms of en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, adverse event rate, recurrence rate, and hospital stay and cost.

Results: Totally, 128 Lesions (ESD = 84; TEM = 44) were included, with 58 Lesions within the matched groups (ESD = 29; TEM = 29). Both the ESD and TEM groups had identical en bloc resection (100.0% vs 100.0%, P = 1.000), R0 resection (82.8% vs 96.6%, P = 0.194), adverse event (0.0% vs 6.9%, P = 0.491), and recurrence (0.0% vs 3.4%, P = 1.000) rates. Nevertheless, the median hospital stay [ESD: 5.5 (4.5-6.0) vs TEM: 10.0 (7.0-12.0) days; P < 0.001], and cost [ESD: 11.6 (9.8-12.6) vs TEM: 20.9 (17.0-25.1) kilo-China Yuan, P < 0.001] were remarkably shorter and less for ESD.

Conclusion: Both ESD and TEM were well-tolerated and yielded favorable outcomes for the local removal of clinical stage 1 rectal NETs. ESD exhibits shorter hospital stay and fewer costs than TEM.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
5.00%
发文量
1164
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信