Current opinion in gastroenterology · 2026
Neuroendocrine tumors of the stomach and duodenum: evolving classification, endoscopic management, and surveillance.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chatterjee Arjun, Kim Michelle K
Аннотация
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gastric and duodenal neuroendocrine tumors are increasingly encountered in gastroenterology practice, often as incidental findings during upper endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging. This review summarizes recent advances in epidemiology, classification, diagnostic evaluation, endoscopic management, surgical decision-making, and surveillance for these tumors.
RECENT FINDINGS: Contemporary epidemiologic data show a rising incidence of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, likely reflecting increased endoscopic detection, improved imaging, and greater diagnostic recognition. Modern classification emphasizes anatomic site, differentiation, grade, functional status, and subtype-specific biology. For gastric neuroendocrine tumors, management differs substantially among type 1, type 2, type 3, and emerging proton pump inhibitor-associated tumors. Type 1 tumors are usually indolent and may be managed with surveillance or endoscopic resection, whereas type 3 tumors require careful staging because of higher metastatic potential. For duodenal neuroendocrine tumors, tumor location, particularly ampullary or periampullary involvement, strongly influences staging, resection strategy, and surveillance. Endoscopic resection is increasingly used for selected low-risk lesions, including small type 3 gastric neuroendocrine tumors and nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors, although prospective evidence remains limited.
SUMMARY: Gastric and duodenal neuroendocrine tumors require individualized, risk-adapted management based on site, subtype, size, grade, invasion depth, lymphovascular invasion, nodal status, metastatic disease, and functional context. Endoscopy remains central to diagnosis and treatment, while EUS, cross-sectional imaging, and somatostatin receptor imaging should be used selectively when results will alter management. Multidisciplinary decision-making is essential for higher risk lesions, borderline cases, and patients being considered for organ-preserving therapy.
RECENT FINDINGS: Contemporary epidemiologic data show a rising incidence of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, likely reflecting increased endoscopic detection, improved imaging, and greater diagnostic recognition. Modern classification emphasizes anatomic site, differentiation, grade, functional status, and subtype-specific biology. For gastric neuroendocrine tumors, management differs substantially among type 1, type 2, type 3, and emerging proton pump inhibitor-associated tumors. Type 1 tumors are usually indolent and may be managed with surveillance or endoscopic resection, whereas type 3 tumors require careful staging because of higher metastatic potential. For duodenal neuroendocrine tumors, tumor location, particularly ampullary or periampullary involvement, strongly influences staging, resection strategy, and surveillance. Endoscopic resection is increasingly used for selected low-risk lesions, including small type 3 gastric neuroendocrine tumors and nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors, although prospective evidence remains limited.
SUMMARY: Gastric and duodenal neuroendocrine tumors require individualized, risk-adapted management based on site, subtype, size, grade, invasion depth, lymphovascular invasion, nodal status, metastatic disease, and functional context. Endoscopy remains central to diagnosis and treatment, while EUS, cross-sectional imaging, and somatostatin receptor imaging should be used selectively when results will alter management. Multidisciplinary decision-making is essential for higher risk lesions, borderline cases, and patients being considered for organ-preserving therapy.