Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Jun 15, 2026; 18(6): 118531
Published online Jun 15, 2026. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v18.i6.118531
Published online Jun 15, 2026. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v18.i6.118531
Table 1 The characteristics of these 38 patients with non-R0 endoscopic resection
| Total (n = 38) | |
| Age (year), mean ± SD | 45.7 ± 13.6 |
| Lesion size (mm), mean ± SD | 7.2 ± 2.6 |
| Gender (%) | |
| Male | 57.9 (22/38) |
| Female | 42.1 (16/38) |
| Location (anus, %) | |
| ≤ 5 cm | 42.1 (16/38) |
| 6-10 cm | 47.4 (18/38) |
| > 10 cm | 10.5 (4/38) |
| Endoscopic resection method (%) | |
| EMR | 47.4 (18/38) |
| ESD | 52.6 (20/38) |
| Positive margins (%) | |
| Vertical | 100.0 (38/38) |
| Lateral | 0 (0/38) |
| Lymphovascular invasion (%) | 0 (0/38) |
| Histologic grade (%) | |
| G1 | 84.2 (32/38) |
| G2 | 15.8 (6/38) |
- Citation: Lin SY, Li ZH, Xu GL, Weng J, Bai KH. Is salvage surgery necessary for non-R0 endoscopic resection of small rectal neuroendocrine tumors? World J Gastrointest Oncol 2026; 18(6): 118531
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v18/i6/118531.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v18.i6.118531