title: Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus local excision for early rectal neoplasms: a comparative study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Transanal local excision (LE) is a well-established treatment option for early rectal neoplasms not amenable to complete colonoscopic removal. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been introduced recently as a novel procedure that enables en bloc resection of large rectal neoplasms. To date, no report comparing the two approaches can be found in the literature. This study aimed to compare the short-term clinical outcomes between ESD and LE for early rectal neoplasms.
  
  
  METHODS
  Between 2007 and 2010, 14 patients with early rectal neoplasms deemed not feasible for en bloc endoscopic resection using conventional techniques underwent ESD. They were compared with a matched cohort of 30 patients who had early rectal neoplasms and underwent LE between 2000 and 2009. Short-term clinical outcomes including postprocedure recovery and morbidity were compared between the two groups.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The mean lesion size was comparable between the ESD and LE groups (2.9 vs 2.6 cm; P = 0.423), but the mean distance of the lesions from the anal verge was greater in the ESD group (8.6 vs 5.0 cm; P = 0.001). En bloc resection was achieved for 12 patients (85.7%) in the ESD group and for all the patients in the LE group. The ESD group exhibited a trend toward a longer operative time (77.5 vs 50.0 min; P = 0.081) but lower morbidity (7.1 vs 33.3%; P = 0.076). The time to full ambulation was shorter in the ESD group (0 vs 1 day; P = 0.005), but the hospital stay was similar in the two groups (2.5 vs 4.0 days; P = 0.129).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For the treatment of early rectal neoplasms, ESD offers better short-term clinical outcomes in terms of faster recovery and possibly lower morbidity than LE. Further prospective studies with a larger sample are needed to validate the benefits of rectal ESD.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China. honsf@surgery.cuhk.edu.hk
authors.forename: Sophie S F
authors.initials: SS
authors.lastname: Hon
authors.forename: Simon S M
authors.initials: SS
authors.lastname: Ng
authors.forename: Philip W Y
authors.initials: PW
authors.lastname: Chiu
authors.forename: Francis K L
authors.initials: FK
authors.lastname: Chan
authors.forename: Enders K W
authors.initials: EK
authors.lastname: Ng
authors.forename: Jimmy C M
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Janet F Y
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: K L
authors.initials: KL
authors.lastname: Leung
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003082:Colectomy / Q000379:methods*; D003113:Colonoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology; D012004:Rectal Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome