Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Early-stage non-polypoid neoplastic lesions, particularly Laterally Spreading Tumors - Granular Type (LST-G) larger than 20mm, require effective endoscopic removal to prevent malignant progression. The two primary techniques for resecting these lesions are Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD). EMR is a widely used, minimally invasive technique that involves resecting the lesion with a diathermic snare after submucosal injection. While effective and safe, EMR often necessitates piecemeal resection, increasing the risk of local recurrence. In contrast, ESD, developed in Asia, allows for en bloc resection regardless of lesion size, ensuring more accurate histopathological assessment and lower recurrence rates. However, ESD requires greater technical expertise, has longer procedural times, and carries a higher risk of complications. In Western clinical practice, EMR remains the standard treatment, whereas ESD is selectively performed in high-expertise centers. Given the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing EMR and ESD in Western populations, this study aims to provide robust clinical evidence to guide treatment decisions. The primary objective of this study is to compare the recurrence/residual adenomatous tissue rate at 6 and 12 months between EMR and ESD in patients with LST-G lesions of the colon and rectum
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Recurrence/Adenomatous Residual Rate
Timeframe: 6 and 12 months after treatment