Skip to main content

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients and tumors

From: The outcomes of modified endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors and the value of endoscopic morphology classification in endoscopic resection

 Total(n = 338)m-EMR(n = 79)ESD(n = 259)P value
Patient Characteristics
 Age, y   0.376
  Mean ± SD49.49 ± 10.850.4 ± 11.149.2 ± 10.7 
  Median (range)49(15–80)49(16–77)49(15–80) 
 Sex, n (%)   0.762
  Male206(60.9%)47(59.5%)159 (61.4%) 
  Female132(39.1%)32(40.5%)100 (38.6%) 
Tumor Characteristics
 Lesion size, mm   0.004*
  Mean ± SD6.8 ± 2.95.8 ± 1.97.1 ± 3.1 
  Median (range)6.0(2–18)6.0 (2–10)6.0 (2–18) 
 Lesion size group, n (%)   0.011*
  < 10 mm275(81.4%)72(91.1%)203(78.4%) 
  ≥ 10 mm63(18.6%)7(8.9%)56(21.6%) 
 Location, n(%)
  Upper22(6.5%)6(7.6%)16(6.2%)0.552
  Middle170(50.3%)43(54.4%)127(49.0%) 
  Lower146(43.2%)30(38.0%)116(44.8%) 
 Histopathological grade, n (%)   0.681
  Grade 1286(84.6%)68(86.1%)218(84.2%) 
  Grade 252(15.4%)11(13.9%)41(15.8%) 
 Invasion layer, n (%)   0.636
  Mucosal75(22.2%)16(20.3%)59(22.8%) 
  Submucosal263(77.8%)63(79.7%)200(77.2%) 
 Endoscopic morphology, n (%)
  Ia39(11.5%)6(7.6%)33(12.7%)0.146
  Ib230(68.1%)59(74.7%)171(66.0%) 
  II51(15.1%)13(16.4%)38(14.7%) 
  III18(5.3%)1(1.3%)17(6.6%) 
Outcomes
 Procedure time, min   0.000*
  Mean ± SD15.3 ± 9.49.1 ± 4.417.2 ± 9.7 
  Median (range)12.0 (3–56)8.0 (3–26)15.0(4–56) 
 En bloc resection, n (%)334(98.8%)78 (98.7%)256 (98.8%)1.000
 Complete resection(R0), n (%)310(91.7%)72(91.1%)238(91.9%)0.832
 Procedure-related adverse events, n (%)9(2.7%)2(2.6%)7(2.7%)0.572
  Postprocedural bleeding7(2.1%)1(1.3%)6(2.3%) 
  Perforation2(0.6%)1(1.3%)1(0.4%) 
 Operation involving incomplete resectiona, n (%)7(2.1%)1(1.3%)6(2.3%)0.902
  1. ESD Endoscopic submucosal dissection, m-EMR Modified endoscopic mucosal resection, SD standard deviation
  2. *p < 0.05
  3. aOne patient in the m-EMR group and 4 patients in the ESD group underwent subsequent surgery, two patient in the ESD group underwent additional ESD due to the positive resection margins