» Articles » PMID: 39043886

Clinical Outcomes After Endoscopic Resection and the Risk of Lymph Node Metastasis in Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: a Single-center Retrospective Study

Overview
Journal Surg Endosc
Publisher Springer
Date 2024 Jul 23
PMID 39043886
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Aim: The incidence of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (R-NETs) has increased in recent years. However, the predictors of lymph node (LN) metastasis and clinical outcomes, particularly following endoscopic treatment, remain unclear. Our study aims to elucidate the potential risk factors for LN metastasis and the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic resection in R-NETs.

Methods: A total of 128 patients with R-NETs were retrospectively identified from a single center between June 2012 and December 2021. Risk factors for LN metastasis in R-NETs were analyzed using multivariate analysis. Additionally, the clinical outcomes of endoscopic resections in patients with R-NETs were assessed.

Results: In our study, 128 patients with R-NETs were retrospectively analyzed. The risk factors for LN metastasis determined by multivariate analysis were tumor size and patient age at diagnosis. Among the 111 patients treated with endoscopic resection and with tumor margin records available, 92 underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and 19 underwent conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the positive rates of basal tumor margin and lateral tumor margin. Furthermore, 64 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for R-NETs were successfully followed up (range, 1.64-76.71 months), during which only one patient developed local recurrence.

Conclusion: Tumor size and age at diagnosis were predictors for LN metastasis of R-NETs. Both ESD and EMR are alternative techniques with a favorable prognosis for R-NETs, even in cases with positive resection margins. However, due to the relatively small number of patients undergoing EMR and missing data in follow-up protocols, definitive conclusions require further large-scale studies.

Citing Articles

GATIS score: An innovative prognostic score for rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Paramythiotis D, Tsavdaris D, Karlafti E World J Gastroenterol. 2025; 31(6):100458.

PMID: 39958453 PMC: 11752696. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i6.100458.

References
1.
Pavel M, Oberg K, Falconi M, Krenning E, Sundin A, Perren A . Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2020; 31(7):844-860. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.03.304. View

2.
Maione F, Chini A, Milone M, Gennarelli N, Manigrasso M, Maione R . Diagnosis and Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETs). Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(5). PMC: 8145857. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11050771. View

3.
Gallo C, Rossi R, Cavalcoli F, Barbaro F, Boskoski I, Invernizzi P . Rectal neuroendocrine tumors: Current advances in management, treatment, and surveillance. World J Gastroenterol. 2022; 28(11):1123-1138. PMC: 8985485. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i11.1123. View

4.
Das S, Dasari A . Epidemiology, Incidence, and Prevalence of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Are There Global Differences?. Curr Oncol Rep. 2021; 23(4):43. PMC: 8118193. DOI: 10.1007/s11912-021-01029-7. View

5.
Scherubl H . Rectal carcinoids are on the rise: early detection by screening endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2009; 41(2):162-5. DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1119456. View