Rectal carcinoids: a systematic review

Abstract

JournalSurgical endoscopy

Is endoscopic ultrasonography essential for endoscopic resection of small rectal neuroendocrine tumors?

“…Endoscopic treatment for rectal NETs is considered a curative treatment for lesions ≤ 10 mm in diameter and without lymphovascular invasion or metastasis. However, metastasis was reportedly detected in 9.7% of cases of ≤ 10 mm rectal NETs[13], and the reported range of rates of distant metastasis in patients with rectal NETs is 2%-8%[10,14,15]. In our study, lymphovascular invasion was found in 1 patient.…”

ENETS Consensus Guidelines Update for Colorectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

“…As minimally invasive procedures gather momentum and improve in completeness of excision, cut-off sizes may need to be revised. In the series by Gleeson et al [4], no metastases were seen in lesions ≤9 mm, and local resection was deemed safe in lesions between 10 and 16 mm according to McDermott et al [13] (this was, however, a pooled analysis with data quality scoring low/moderate for all series included). In the series of rectal lesions by Yangong et al [3], no recurrence was seen in 248 cases after transanal resection and endoscopic polypectomy.…”

Nowotwory neuroendokrynne jelita grubego — zasady postępowania (rekomendowane przez Polską Sieć Guzów Neuroendokrynnych)

“…However, the patient must be informed that in the case of unfavourable results of the histopathological examination of the tumour removed via TEM, a radical rectal resection may be necessary. In a series of cases described by Gleeson et al, no metastases were found if the lesion size did not exceed 9 mm [35]. Local resection was considered safe in lesions of 10 to 16 mm in diameter in the study by McDermott et al (however, it was a collective analysis, in which the quality of data was evaluated as low or moderate for all the cases included in the series) [36].…”