
==== Front
J Gastrointest Oncol
J Gastrointest Oncol
JGO
Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology
2078-6891
2219-679X
AME Publishing Company

jgo-15-04-2016
10.21037/jgo-24-471
Editorial
Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: how safe is endoscopic resection?
Yoon Ji Yoon https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8897-7144
1
Nagula Satish 1
Kim Michelle Kang 2
1 Dr. Henry D. Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA;
2 Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA
Correspondence to: Ji Yoon Yoon, BMBCh, MSCR. Dr. Henry D. Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Madison Ave., Annenberg 5-12, New York, NY 10029, USA. Email: Jiyoon.yoon@mountsinai.org.
17 8 2024
31 8 2024
15 4 20162018
22 6 2024
09 7 2024
2024 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.
2024
Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.
Keywords:

Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (dNETs)
endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)
endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)
NIH T32CA225617
==== Body
pmcNeuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are heterogenous neoplasms that can occur anywhere in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract; within the GI tract, NETs are most commonly encountered in the small bowel (jejunum/ileum), rectum, and pancreas, with duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (dNETs) accounting for only 2.8% of incident NETs (1). Nevertheless, in recent decades, NET incidence has been rising, attributed to increasing use of diagnostic imaging and endoscopy, with a 4-fold rise dNET incidence reported between the 1980s and 2010 (2). In the majority of cases, dNETs are sporadic and non-functional (i.e., no clinical hormonal syndrome is associated), raising the question of appropriate intervention for frequently incidental diagnoses of small, generally indolent, neoplasms (3).

European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS, 2023) guidelines recommend endoscopic resection for non-functional dNETs <10 mm in size after appropriate evaluation (including endoscopic ultrasound for tumors 5–10 mm), as risk of nodal metastasis is low, and similar survival outcomes as compared to surgery (4). The optimal method of endoscopic resection, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), is not known.

With greater ability to achieve en bloc and pathologic margin-negative (R0) resection compared to EMR, ESD has become more broadly adopted and is the first line therapy in epithelial lesions, such as early gastric cancer. The added depth of dissection allows treatment of submucosal lesions, which may not be feasible with EMR. The duodenum remains the most technically difficult location to perform ESD, with high adverse event rates reported for epithelial lesions (intraprocedural perforation 13–50%, delayed perforation 9%, bleeding 18%, need for surgery 14%) (5-7). Outcomes specific to submucosal lesions in the duodenum are not well studied.

In this issue of the Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Li et al. present the outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic resection for non-ampullary dNETs ≤10 mm (8), adding valuable clinical data, particularly for ESD (10 of 12 patients), for which few studies exist (9-13). Technical outcomes of ESD, including en-bloc and pathologic complete resection were favorable at 90% and 80%, respectively (2/10 patients with a positive vertical margin on pathology), and comparable to one larger study of 20 patients (11). The only adverse event reported was one case (10%) of intraprocedural perforation, though the patient did not require surgery. This patient also had a positive vertical margin, doubly illustrating the challenges of ESD in the thin duodenal wall. The authors report 53 months of follow up time after endoscopic resection (ER), during which no remnant lesions, recurrence, or distant metastasis were found (including in four higher-risk patients with piecemeal resection, grade 2 lesions and positive pathologic margins).

While this study by Li et al. does not have sufficient sample size for comparison of EMR vs. ESD techniques, literature for EMR in dNETs allow for more robust comparison. In one large study by Noh et al. (including dNET <10 mm, N=86), EMR achieved en bloc resection in 98.8%, with relatively low adverse event rates (5.8% perforation, 2.3% post-procedure bleeding) (14). As may be expected for use of EMR in submucosal lesions, the rate of histologic complete resection was low, with only 55.8% achieving histologic complete resection (the majority, 36.4%, had a positive vertical margin). Despite high rates of margin positivity, only 6% patients experienced a recurrence during a median follow up of 88 months. Only younger age at diagnosis and lesion size (≥10 mm) were identified as risk factors for NET recurrence on multivariable analysis.

Alternative options to endoscopic resection for patients with dNETs are limited given the significant morbidity of surgery (local resection or pancreatoduodenectomy), and limited evidence for a watch-and-wait strategy (15). While larger, ideally prospective studies and longer-term follow up are desired, this study by Li et al. adds to the growing body of literature supporting the safety and efficacy of endoscopic resection and ESD for dNETs, at least in specialized centers with highly-skilled endoscopists. However, in the context of existing technologies, EMR is more readily available, has shorter procedure times and lower adverse event rates compared to ESD. Endoscopists may reasonably question the utility of the technically-challenging ESD in small and indolent dNETs, risking high adverse event rates to achieve a technically superior, but clinically equivalent outcome. The utility of ESD may become more evident in specific scenarios, such as in patients with larger dNETs who are not candidates for conventional surgery, and/or younger patients with longer life expectancy, to which further research should be directed.

Supplementary

The article’s supplementary files as

10.21037/jgo-24-471

Acknowledgments

Funding: J.Y.Y. receives research and salary support through NIH T32 (CA225617 ).

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Provenance and Peer Review: This article was commissioned by the editorial office, Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. The article did not undergo external peer review.

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jgo.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jgo-24-471/coif). J.Y.Y. receives research and salary support through NIH T32 (CA225617). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
==== Refs
References

1 Yao JC Hassan M Phan A One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2008;26 :3063-72. 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.4377 18565894
2 Fitzgerald TL Dennis SO Kachare SD Increasing incidence of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: Incidental discovery of indolent disease? Surgery 2015;158 :466-71. 10.1016/j.surg.2015.03.042 26013986
3 Hoffmann KM Furukawa M Jensen RT . Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: Classification, functional syndromes, diagnosis and medical treatment. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2005;19 :675-97. 10.1016/j.bpg.2005.05.009 16253893
4 Panzuto F Ramage J Pritchard DM European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) 2023 guidance paper for gastroduodenal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) G1-G3. J Neuroendocrinol 2023;35 :e13306. 10.1111/jne.13306 37401795
5 Yahagi N Kato M Ochiai Y Outcomes of endoscopic resection for superficial duodenal epithelial neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2018;88 :676-82. 10.1016/j.gie.2018.05.002 29753040
6 Kantsevoy SV . Duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Is it ready for primetime? (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2020;91 :1138-9. 10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.017 32327121
7 Fukuhara S Kato M Iwasaki E Management of perforation related to endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial duodenal epithelial tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2020;91 :1129-37. 10.1016/j.gie.2019.09.024 31563595
8 Li W Liu Y Dou L Treatment outcomes of endoscopic resection for nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors. J Gastrointest Oncol 2024;15 :1255-64. 10.21037/jgo-23-692 38989434
9 Matsumoto S Miyatani H Yoshida Y Duodenal carcinoid tumors: 5 cases treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;74 :1152-6. 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.029 21944312
10 Suzuki S Ishii N Uemura M Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors. Surg Endosc 2012;26 :759-63. 10.1007/s00464-011-1948-y 21993939
11 Nabi Z Ramchandani M Asif S Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors. J Gastrointest Surg 2022;26 :275-7. 10.1007/s11605-021-05133-8 34508292
12 Brito HP Torres IT Turke KC Comparison of endoscopic resection techniques for duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: systematic review. Endosc Int Open 2021;9 :E1214-21. 10.1055/a-1487-5594 34447867
13 Kim GH Kim JI Jeon SW Endoscopic resection for duodenal carcinoid tumors: a multicenter, retrospective study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;29 :318-24. 10.1111/jgh.12390 24117946
14 Noh JH Kim DH Park K Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection versus modified endoscopic mucosal resection for duodenal neuroendocrine tumor. Surg Endosc 2023;37 :3884-92. 10.1007/s00464-023-09885-z 36717428
15 Tsutsumi K Kato M Kakushima N Efficacy of endoscopic preventive procedures to reduce delayed adverse events after endoscopic resection of superficial nonampullary duodenal epithelial tumors: a meta-analysis of observational comparative trials. Gastrointest Endosc 2021;93 :367-374.e3. 10.1016/j.gie.2020.08.017 32835670
