Conventional versus rubber band traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective study (with video)
{"title":"Conventional versus rubber band traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective study (with video)","authors":"Jinbang Peng, Jiajia Lin, Lina Fang, Jingjing Zhou, Yaqi Song, Chaoyu Yang, Yu Zhang, Binbin Gu, Ziwei Ji, Yandi Lu, Xinli Mao, Lingling Yan","doi":"10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, including rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted ESD for the treatment of small rectal lesions are still debated.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Aims</h3><p>We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of rubber band traction-assisted ESD (RBT-ESD) to conventional ESD (C-ESD).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>This study retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with r-NET treated with ESD between October 2021 and October 2023. Our study assessed differences between the groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, muscular layer injury, surgical complications, operation time, resection speed, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, and recurrence rate.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>A total of 119 patients with r-NETs participated in this study (RBT-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 27; C-ESD group, <i>n</i> = 92). The operation time in RBT-ESD group was shorter than in C-ESD group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16.0 min [9.0–22.0 min] vs. 18.0 min [13.3–27.0 min], <i>P</i> = 0.056). However, the resection speed was significantly faster in the RBT-ESD group (6.7 vs. 4.1 mm<sup>2</sup>/min, <i>P</i> = 0.005). Furthermore, the RBT-ESD group showed significantly less muscular layer injury (<i>P</i> = 0.047) and faster diet recovery (<i>P</i> = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in the complete resection rate, surgical complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, or recurrence rate between the two groups.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>For r-NETs of < 2 cm in size, the RBT method did not significantly shorten the operation time but resulted in faster resection speed, less muscular layer injury, and earlier postoperative recovery to a liquid diet.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Graphical Abstract</h3>\n","PeriodicalId":501625,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy","volume":"141 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11244-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, including rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs). However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted ESD for the treatment of small rectal lesions are still debated.
Aims
We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of rubber band traction-assisted ESD (RBT-ESD) to conventional ESD (C-ESD).
Methods
This study retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with r-NET treated with ESD between October 2021 and October 2023. Our study assessed differences between the groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, muscular layer injury, surgical complications, operation time, resection speed, time to liquid diet, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, and recurrence rate.
Results
A total of 119 patients with r-NETs participated in this study (RBT-ESD group, n = 27; C-ESD group, n = 92). The operation time in RBT-ESD group was shorter than in C-ESD group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16.0 min [9.0–22.0 min] vs. 18.0 min [13.3–27.0 min], P = 0.056). However, the resection speed was significantly faster in the RBT-ESD group (6.7 vs. 4.1 mm2/min, P = 0.005). Furthermore, the RBT-ESD group showed significantly less muscular layer injury (P = 0.047) and faster diet recovery (P = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in the complete resection rate, surgical complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital cost, or recurrence rate between the two groups.
Conclusion
For r-NETs of < 2 cm in size, the RBT method did not significantly shorten the operation time but resulted in faster resection speed, less muscular layer injury, and earlier postoperative recovery to a liquid diet.