Park SB, Kim DJ, Kim HW, Choi CW, Kang DH, Kim SJ, Nam HS. Is endoscopic ultrasonography essential for endoscopic resection of small rectal neuroendocrine tumors? World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23(11): 2037-2043 [PMID: 28373770 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i11.2037]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Hyung Wook Kim, MD, PhD, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Beomeo-ri, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan-si, Gyeongsangnam-do 626-770, South Korea. mdkhwook@gmail.com
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 21, 2017; 23(11): 2037-2043 Published online Mar 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i11.2037
Table 1 Clinical data of the small rectal neuroendocrine tumors n (%)
Parameter
Total (n = 120)
Tumor size in mm, mean ± SD
Endoscopy
5.47 ± 1.78
EUS
5.53 ± 1.76
Histology
5.54 ± 2.15
Endoscopic morphology
Sessile or slightly elevated
110 (91.7)
Flat
10 (8.3)
Central depression
8 (6.7)
Resection method
Conventional EMR
3 (2.5)
EMR with suction methods
70 (58.3)
ESD
47 (39.2)
Histologic grade
1
120 (100)
2
0
3
0
Histologic type
Enteroglucagon or L-cell
120 (100)
Enterochromaffin or enterochromaffin-like cell
0
Microscopic invasion
Lymphatic and vascular
1 (0.8)
Lymphatic
0
Vascular
0
Follow-up duration
6-12 mo
84 (70.00)
12-24 mo
13 (10.83)
24-36 mo
16 (13.33)
≥ 36 mo
7 (5.83)
Follow-up in day, median (range)
196 (154-2148)
Follow-up in day, mean ± SD
407.54 ± 374.16
Table 2 Comparison among the sizes measured by endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography and histology
Measurement technique
Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Endoscopy and EUS
P = 0.215
Endoscopy and histology
P = 0.540
EUS and histology
P = 0.933
Table 3 Correlation coefficient among the sizes measured by endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography and histology
Measurement technique
Correlation coefficient
Endoscopy and EUS
0.914 (P < 0.01)
Endoscopy and histology
0.727 (P < 0.01)
EUS and histology
0.727 (P < 0.01)
Table 4 Comparison of depth of invasion measured by endoscopic ultrasonography and histology n (%)
Depth of invasion
EUS
Histology
2nd layer (muscularis mucosa)
9 (7.5)
2 (1.7)
3rd layer (submucosa)
111 (92.5)
118 (98.3)
4th layer (muscularis propria)
0 (0)
0 (0)
EUS accuracy
111 (92.5)
Citation: Park SB, Kim DJ, Kim HW, Choi CW, Kang DH, Kim SJ, Nam HS. Is endoscopic ultrasonography essential for endoscopic resection of small rectal neuroendocrine tumors? World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23(11): 2037-2043