Successful Complete CURE En-Bloc Resection of Large Colonic Polyps By Endoscopic Mucosal Or Submucosal Resection: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

2007 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. AB98
Author(s):  
Srinivas R. Puli ◽  
Jyotsna B.K. Reddy ◽  
Daphne Antillon ◽  
Jamal A. Ibdah ◽  
Mainor R. Antillon
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Colonic Polyps ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Complete Cure ◽  
Submucosal Resection

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial squamous esophageal neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 127-127
Author(s):  
Joon Sung Kim ◽  
Byung-Wook Kim ◽  
Jeong-Seon Ji ◽  
Bo-In Lee ◽  
Hwang Choi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Complete Cure ◽  
Esophageal Neoplasia ◽  
Submucosal Dissection

127 Background: The number of ESD candidates with esophageal neoplasia has increased with the recent development of endoscopy. Increasing number of studies has recently reported the application of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for treatment of esophageal lesions. However, most of these series were retrospective and single center studies that included only a relatively small number of cases. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of ESD for esophageal lesions. Methods: Comprehensive literature searches were performed on studies that reported ESD for the removal of esophageal dysplasia or esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched using the primary keywords “endoscopic submucosal dissection”, “esophagus” and “esophageal”. Statistical analyses were executed by the aid of Comprehensive Meta-analysis software version 2. Results: A total of 17 studies were identified. Meta-analysis revealed pooled estimates of complete cure en bloc resection as 89.7% (95%CI 85%-93%; I2 =54.6%) and pooled estimates of en bloc resection as 96% (95%CI;93%-98%; I2=21.2). The pooled estimates of complications of ESD such as bleeding, perforation and stenosis were 2%, 5%, 12%, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed by grouping studies into two groups. Complete cure en bloc resection was 92.4% for studies from Japan and 81.6% for studies from other countries than Japan. Conclusions: ESD appeared to be an extremely effective technique to achieve complete cure en bloc resection of superficial squamous esophageal neoplasia. The very low rate of complications also shows the potential safety of this approach. However, the resection rates were statistically different for studies from Japan and for studies from other countries. Standardization of techniques and equipment may be needed before ESD can be widely accepted for treatment of superficial squamous esophageal neoplasms.

scholarly journals Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection in the management of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (10) ◽  
pp. E1264-E1272
Author(s):  
Faisal Kamal ◽  
Muhammad Ali Khan ◽  
Wade Lee-Smith ◽  
Zubair Khan ◽  
Sachit Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Colorectal Polyps ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Mucosal Resection ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Recently, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has shown promising results in the management of colorectal polyps. Some studies have shown better outcomes compared to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare UEMR and EMR in the management of colorectal polyps. Methods We searched several databases from inception to November 2019 to identify studies comparing UEMR and EMR. Outcomes assessed included rates of en bloc resection, complete macroscopic resection, recurrent/residual polyps on follow-up colonoscopy, complete resection confirmed by histology and adverse events. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence interval were calculated using a fixed effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistic. Funnel plots and Egger’s test were used to assess publication bias. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessment of quality of observational studies, and the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias for RCTs Results Seven studies with 1291 patients were included; two were randomized controlled trials and five were observational. UEMR demonstrated statistically significantly better efficacy in rates of en bloc resection, pooled RR 1.16 (1.08, 1.26), complete macroscopic resection, pooled RR 1.28 (1.18, 1.39), recurrent/residual polyps; pooled RR 0.26 (0.12, 0.56) and complete resection confirmed by histology; pooled RR 0.75 (0.57, 0.98). There was no significant difference in adverse events (AEs); pooled RR 0.68 (0.44, 1.05). Conclusions This meta-analysis found statistically significantly better rates of en bloc resection, complete macroscopic resection, and lower risk of recurrent/residual polyps with UEMR compared to EMR. We found no significant difference in AEs between the two techniques.

scholarly journals Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (12) ◽  
pp. E1884-E1894
Author(s):  
Rajat Garg ◽  
Amandeep Singh ◽  
Babu P. Mohan ◽  
Gautam Mankaney ◽  
Miguel Regueiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Colorectal Polyps ◽  
Incomplete Resection ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Delayed Bleeding ◽  
Mucosal Resection

Abstract Background and study aims Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for colorectal polyps has been reported to have good outcomes in recent studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness and safety of UEMR to conventional EMR (CEMR). Methods A comprehensive search of multiple databases (through May 2020) was performed to identify studies that reported outcome of UEMR and CEMR for colorectal lesions. Outcomes assessed included incomplete resection, rate of recurrence, en bloc resection, adverse events (AEs) for UEMR and CEMR. Results A total of 1,651 patients with 1,704 polyps were included from nine studies. There was a significantly lower rate of incomplete resection (odds ratio [OR]: 0.19 (95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.05–0.78, P = 0.02) and polyp recurrence (OR: 0.41, 95 % CI, 0.24–0.72, P = 0.002) after UEMR. Compared to CEMR, rates overall complications (relative risk [RR]: 0.66 (95 % CI, 0.48–0.90) (P = 0.008), and intra-procedural bleeding (RR: 0.59, 95 % CI, 0.41–0.84, P = 0.004) were significantly lower with UEMR. The recurrence rate was also lower for large non-pedunculated polyps ≥ 10 mm (OR 0.24, 95 % CI, 0.10–0.57, P = 0.001) and ≥ 20 mm (OR 0.14, 95 % CI, 0.02–0.72, P = 0.01). The rates of en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, perforation and post-polypectomy syndrome were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that UEMR is more effective and safer than CEMR with lower rates of recurrence and AEs. UEMR use should be encouraged over CEMR.

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) compared with conventional ESD for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. McCarty ◽  
Ahmad Najdat Bazarbashi ◽  
Christopher C. Thompson ◽  
Hiroyuki Aihara
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Procedure Duration

Abstract Background Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is increasingly utilized to overcome the complexity of conventional ESD. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of hybrid ESD for treatment of colorectal lesions. Methods Search strategies were developed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Pooled proportions were calculated with rates estimated using random effects models. Measured outcomes included en bloc resection, procedure-associated complications, recurrence, and need for surgery. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare effectiveness of conventional versus hybrid ESD. Results 16 studies (751 patients) were included with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) lesion size of 27.96 (10.55) mm. En bloc resection rate was 81.63 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 72.07 – 88.44; I2  = 80.89). Complications, recurrences, and need for surgery occurred in 7.74 % (95 %CI 4.78 – 12.31; I2  = 65.84), 4.52 % (95 %CI 1.40 – 13.65; I2  = 76.81), and 3.64 % (95 %CI 1.76 – 7.37; I2  = 15.52), respectively. Mean procedure duration was 48.83 (22.37) minutes. On subgroup analyses comparing outcomes for conventional (n = 1703) versus hybrid ESD (n = 497), procedure duration was significantly shorter for hybrid ESD (mean difference 18.45 minutes; P = 0.003), with lower complication rates (P = 0.04); however, hybrid ESD had lower en bloc resection rates (P < 0.001). There was no difference in rates of recurrence or surgery (P > 0.05). Conclusion While hybrid ESD was safe and effective for removal of colorectal lesions, with shorter procedure duration, fewer complications, and no difference in recurrence versus conventional ESD, hybrid ESD was associated with a lower en bloc resection rate.

Higher rate of en bloc resection with underwater than conventional endoscopic mucosal resection: A meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Tziatzios ◽  
Paraskevas Gkolfakis ◽  
Konstantinos Triantafyllou ◽  
Lorenzo Fuccio ◽  
Antonio Facciorusso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Mucosal Resection

scholarly journals Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Visible Dysplasia Treatment in Ulcerative Colitis Patients: Cases Series and Systematic Review of Literature

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaele Manta ◽  
Angelo Zullo ◽  
Donato Alessandro Telesca ◽  
Danilo Castellani ◽  
Ugo Germani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ulcerative Colitis ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Neoplastic Lesions

Abstract Background and Aims Ulcerative colitis [UC] patients are at an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer due to chronic inflammation. Endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD] allows removal of non-invasive neoplastic lesions in the colon, but few data are available on its efficacy in UC patients. Methods Data from consecutive UC patients diagnosed with visible dysplastic lesions in the colon who underwent ESD were evaluated. The en bloc removal, R0 resection and complication rates were calculated. Local recurrence and metachronous lesions during follow-up were identified. A systematic review of the literature with pooled data analysis was performed. Results A total of 53 UC patients [age: 65 years; range 30–74; M/F: 31/22] underwent ESD. The en bloc resection rate was 100%, and the R0 resection rate was 96.2%. Bleeding occurred in seven [13.2%] patients, and perforation in three [5.6%] cases, all treated at endoscopy. No recurrence was observed, but two metachronous lesions were detected. Data from six other studies [three Asian and three European] were available. By pooling data, en bloc resection was successful in 88.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 83.5–92) of 216 lesions and in 91.8% [95% CI = 87.3–94.8] of 208 patients. R0 resection was achieved in 169 ESDs, equivalent to a 78.2% [95% CI = 72.3–83.2] rate for lesions and 81.3% [95% CI = 75.4–86] rate for patients. No difference between European and Asian series was noted. Conclusions This pooled data analysis indicated that ESD is a suitable tool for safely and properly removing non-invasive neoplastic lesions on colonic mucosa of selected UC patients.

scholarly journals Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Papillary Gastric Adenocarcinoma; Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 1465
Author(s):  
Chang Seok Bang ◽  
Jae Jun Lee ◽  
Gwang Ho Baik
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Curative Resection ◽  
En Bloc Resection ◽  
Bloc Resection ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Submucosal Invasion ◽  
High Rate ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Submucosal Dissection

This study evaluated the possibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer with papillary adenocarcinoma (EGC-PAC). PAC, an uncommon pathologic type of stomach cancer, is classified into differentiated-type histology. However, aggressive features, including a high rate of submucosal invasion, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and lymph node metastasis (LNM), have been reported in studies with surgical specimens. Treatment outcomes of ESD for EGC-PAC have not been precisely demonstrated. Core databases were sought for the following inclusion criteria: studies of endoscopic resection or surgery of EGC-PAC presenting the following therapeutic indicators; en bloc resection, complete resection, curative resection, recurrence, complications associated with procedures, LVI, or LNM that enabled an analysis of ESD possibility. Overall, 15 studies were included for systematic review. Frequent submucosal invasion and high LVI were noted in EGC-PAC. However, PAC was not significantly associated with LNM. Pooled en bloc resection, complete resection, and curative resection rates were 89.7% (95% confidence interval: 55.3%–98.4%), 85.3% (67.7%–94.2%), and 67% (43%–84.5%), respectively. No LNM was observed if EGC-PAC satisfied the curative resection criteria. ESD seems technically feasible, although a high LVI rate results in a lower rate of curative resection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document