Background and aim: Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs) often exhibit submucosal tumor-like growth. While endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used, it carries a risk of positive vertical margins, often necessitating repeated surveillance and imposing both financial and psychological burdens on patients. To address this limitation, we developed endoscopic muscularis superficialis dissection (EMSD), a technique involving controlled dissection into the superficial muscularis propria layer to improve complete resection rates. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes of EMSD and ESD for small rNETs.
Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 82 patients (88 rNETs) undergoing ESD or EMSD between May 2019 and June 2025. Primary outcomes included complete resection rates, complication rates, and postoperative hospital stay.
Results: The study analyzed 35 lesions treated with EMSD and 53 with ESD. Both groups had similar tumor characteristics. Compared to ESD, EMSD achieved significantly higher rates of both complete vertical margin resection (100% vs. 69.8%, p < 0.001) and R0 resection (100% vs. 67.9%, p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in procedure time (47.0 ± 17.0 min vs. 40.0 ± 9.5 min; p = 0.070) and postoperative hospital stay (4.0 ± 1.5 days vs. 4.0 ± 1.0 days; p = 0.676). Postoperative bleeding occurred in 1 EMSD patient (2.9%), which was managed endoscopically. No other bleeding or perforation cases occurred.
Conclusions: Compared with ESD, EMSD achieved superior performance in the resection of rNENs ≤ 10 mm in diameter regardless of submucosal invasion depth.
背景与目的:直肠神经内分泌肿瘤(rNETs)常表现为粘膜下肿瘤样生长。虽然内镜下粘膜剥离术(ESD)被广泛应用,但它有垂直切缘阳性的风险,经常需要反复监测,给患者带来经济和心理负担。为了解决这一限制,我们开发了内镜下浅表肌层剥离术(EMSD),这是一种控制浅表固有肌层剥离的技术,以提高完全切除率。本研究旨在比较EMSD和ESD对小rNETs的治疗效果。方法:本回顾性研究纳入了2019年5月至2025年6月期间接受ESD或EMSD治疗的82例患者(88例rNETs)。主要结局包括完全切除率、并发症发生率和术后住院时间。结果:EMSD治疗35例,ESD治疗53例。两组肿瘤特征相似。与ESD相比,EMSD的垂直切缘完全切除率(100% vs. 69.8%, p p p = 0.070)和术后住院时间(4.0±1.5天vs. 4.0±1.0天,p = 0.676)均显著高于ESD。1例EMSD患者(2.9%)术后出血,经内镜处理。无其他出血或穿孔病例发生。结论:与ESD相比,EMSD在切除直径≤10 mm的rNENs时,无论粘膜下浸润深度如何,均具有更好的效果。
{"title":"Comparison of Endoscopic Therapies for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Endoscopic Muscularis Superficialis Dissection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.","authors":"Xiawen Shu, Xue Chen, Yirong Ding, Yun Yi, Lurao Li, Kun Li, Jiaoze Shi, Zhishan Chen, Xing Huang, Ying Chang","doi":"10.1002/jgh3.70348","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.70348","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs) often exhibit submucosal tumor-like growth. While endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used, it carries a risk of positive vertical margins, often necessitating repeated surveillance and imposing both financial and psychological burdens on patients. To address this limitation, we developed endoscopic muscularis superficialis dissection (EMSD), a technique involving controlled dissection into the superficial muscularis propria layer to improve complete resection rates. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes of EMSD and ESD for small rNETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study enrolled 82 patients (88 rNETs) undergoing ESD or EMSD between May 2019 and June 2025. Primary outcomes included complete resection rates, complication rates, and postoperative hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study analyzed 35 lesions treated with EMSD and 53 with ESD. Both groups had similar tumor characteristics. Compared to ESD, EMSD achieved significantly higher rates of both complete vertical margin resection (100% vs. 69.8%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and R0 resection (100% vs. 67.9%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in procedure time (47.0 ± 17.0 min vs. 40.0 ± 9.5 min; <i>p</i> = 0.070) and postoperative hospital stay (4.0 ± 1.5 days vs. 4.0 ± 1.0 days; <i>p</i> = 0.676). Postoperative bleeding occurred in 1 EMSD patient (2.9%), which was managed endoscopically. No other bleeding or perforation cases occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with ESD, EMSD achieved superior performance in the resection of rNENs ≤ 10 mm in diameter regardless of submucosal invasion depth.</p>","PeriodicalId":45861,"journal":{"name":"JGH Open","volume":"10 2","pages":"e70348"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12881991/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146143806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}