Underwater versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis - 01/03/25
Abstract |
Background and Aims |
Effect of underwater endoscopic submucosal dissection (UESD) on clinical outcomes as compared with conventional ESD (CESD) remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data.
Methods |
Online databases were searched for studies comparing UESD with CESD for colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were en-bloc resection, R0 resection, procedure time (minutes), dissection speed (mm2/min), and adverse events. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and standardized mean difference (SMD), along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
Results |
Seven studies with 1401 patients (UESD, 452; CESD, 949) were included. Mean patient age was 69 years, and 57% of patients were men. UESD had both a shorter procedure time (SMD, –1.33; 95% CI, –2.34 to –.32; P = .010) and greater dissection speed (SMD, 1.01; 95% CI, .35-1.68; P = .003) when compared with CESD. No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups with respect to en-bloc resection (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, .37-3.41), R0 resection (OR, 2.36; 95% CI, .79-7.05), delayed bleeding (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, .65-2.74), perforation (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, .64-2.00), and postresection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR, .38; 95% CI, .10-1.42).
Conclusions |
UESD was faster in patients with colorectal lesions but had comparable rates of en-bloc resection, R0 resection, and adverse events when compared with CESD.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Abbreviations : CESD, CI, ESD, OR, PECS, SMD, UESD
Plan
| DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION: We worked to ensure gender balance in the recruitment of human subjects. We worked to ensure ethnic or other types of diversity in the recruitment of human subjects. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we actively worked to promote gender balance in our reference list. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work. |
Vol 101 - N° 3
P. 551 - mars 2025 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Efficacy of hemostatic powder monotherapy versus conventional endoscopic treatment for nonvariceal GI bleeding: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
- Kai Liu, Wei Zhang, Li Gao, Jiawei Bai, Xin Dong, Yue Wang, Hui Chen, Jiaqiang Dong, Nian Fang, Ying Han, Zhiguo Liu
- Long-term outcomes of pneumatic balloon dilation versus peroral endoscopic myotomy in type I and II achalasia patients: a propensity score–matched analysis
- Tanawat Geeratragool, Porakit Boonumnuay, Monthira Maneerattanaporn, Saris Sunsaneevithayakul, Aukapatra Jaruchaiyong, Nawin Penrasamee, Preravit Laothanasin, Pritsana Chuenprapai, Chainarong Phalanusitthepha, Somchai Leelakusolvong
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?