Long-term follow up of endoscopic resection for type 3 gastric NET

Table 1 Patient characteristics of 51 gastric endocrine tumors who underwent endoscopic resection n (%)

Male:female	28:22
Mean age, yr	58.6 ± 12.2
Associated symptoms
Abdominal discomfort	14 (28.0)
Body weight loss	1 (2.0)
Diarrhea	1 (2.0)
Other symptom	1 (2.0)
Associated disease
Diabetes mellitus	5 (10.0)
Thyroid disease	1 (2.0)
Combined other malignancy	2 (4.0)
Number of tumors
1	48 (96.0)
≥ 2	2 (4.0)
Tumor location
Antrum	4 (8.0)
Body	38 (76.0)
Fundus or cardia	8 (16.0)
Tumor size
≤ 10 mm	33 (66.0)
> 10 mm	17 (34.0)
EUS invasion depth
Mucosa and submucosa	49 (98.0)
MP	1 (2.0)
Treatment methods
EMR	41 (82.0)
ESD	9 (18.0)

GET: Gastric endocrine tumor; MP: Muscularis propria; EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Table 2 Treatment outcomes after endoscopic treatment of gastric endocrine tumors n (%)

	EMR(n = 41)	ESD(n = 9)	P value
Mean resection size (range, mm)	9.3 ± 5.6	14.2 ± 7.8	0.055
Tumor size > 10 mm	11 (26.8)	6 (66.7)	0.031
Pathologically complete resection	35 (85.4)	6 (66.7)	0.249
Lymphovascular invasion	1 (2.4)	2 (22.2)	0.080
Additional operation	1 (2.4)	2 (22.2)	0.080

EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Table 3 Analysis of resected tumors

	Tumor size	P value
Complete resection (range, mm)
Yes (n = 40)	9.6 ± 6.3	0.011
No ( = 10)	12.4 ± 6.1
Lymphovascular invasion (range, mm)
Yes (n = 3)	16.3 ± 4.2	0.416
No (n = 47)	9.8 ± 6.2