Endoscopic mucosal resection with double band ligation versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors

Table 1 Characteristics and tumor sizes of the patients in the two groups

	EMR-dB (n = 25)	ESD (n = 25)	P value
Age	47.04 ± 10.58	42.92 ± 10.93	0.182
Sex (Male/Female)	13/12	15/10	0.569
Tumor size (mm)	4.53 ± 1.02	5.140 ± 1.74	0.141
Location (distance from anus) (cm)	7.96 ± 3.52	7.36 ± 2.83	0.509
Resected lesion size (cm)	1.32 ± 0.52	1.58 ± 0.84	0.269

Values are n or mean ± standard deviation. EMR-dB: Endoscopic mucosal resection with double band ligation; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Table 2 Therapeutic outcomes of endoscopic resection in the two groups

	EMR-dB (n = 25)	ESD (n = 25)	P value
Histological complete resection, n (%)	25 (100)	25 (100)	> 0.99
En bloc resection, n (%)	25 (100)	25 (100)	> 0.99
Resection time (min)	6.28 ± 0.75	14.30 ± 1.51	< 0.001
Delayed bleeding perforation	0	2	0.470
Perforation	0	0	> 0.99
Devices cost	$ 494.04 ± $ 85.47	$ 808.98 ± $ 143.67	< 0.001
Histopathological classification			> 0.99
NET G1, n (%)	25 (100)	25 (100)
NET G2	0	0
NET G3	0	0
NEC	0	0
Recurrence follow-up	0	0	> 0.99

Values are n (%) or mean ± standard deviation. EMR-dB: Endoscopic mucosal resection with double band ligation; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection; NET: Neuroendocrine tumor; NEC: Neuroendocrine carcinomas; G: Grade.