← Issue №5/ week of Aug 2, 2026/Endoscopy

Modified endoscopic mucosal resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors ≤10 mm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

From GI Signals issue №5: what this paper found, what it changes, and where it sits against the current standard of care, reviewed by Simon Mathews, MD.

Endoscopy meta analysis · n=440 · Aug 3, 2026 · Dig Liver Dis · IF 4.2

Modified endoscopic mucosal resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors ≤10 mm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

New evidencemeta-analysiscost-effectivenessESDEMR
Clinical takeawayConsider m-EMR as a reasonable first-line option for rectal NETs ≤10 mm, given comparable histologic efficacy to ESD, shorter procedure time, and lower cost, but confirm alignment with ENETS guidance.
What it foundm-EMR and ESD had equivalent histologic complete resection (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03), en bloc resection (P=0.75), and adverse events (P=0.94) for rectal NETs ≤10 mm, with m-EMR having shorter procedure time and lower cost.
ContextRefines prior uncertainty: confirms m-EMR is non-inferior to ESD for small rectal NETs, supporting a shift from more resource-intensive ESD when histologic outcomes are equivalent, but requires careful consideration of ENETS guidelines.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Pang K … Wu D · Digestive and Liver Disease : Official Journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · IF 4.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Read the whole of issue №5 Every paper GI Signals surfaces gets a page like this one. All issues