Cargando…

Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND: In recent years, some traction-assisted approaches have been introduced to facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures by reducing the procedure time and risks related to the procedure. However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissectio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xia, Mengting, Zhou, Yunfeng, Yu, Jiajie, Chen, Wenwen, Huang, Xiaotao, Liao, Juan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6549310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31164139
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1639-z
_version_ 1783423978549805056
author Xia, Mengting
Zhou, Yunfeng
Yu, Jiajie
Chen, Wenwen
Huang, Xiaotao
Liao, Juan
author_facet Xia, Mengting
Zhou, Yunfeng
Yu, Jiajie
Chen, Wenwen
Huang, Xiaotao
Liao, Juan
author_sort Xia, Mengting
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In recent years, some traction-assisted approaches have been introduced to facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures by reducing the procedure time and risks related to the procedure. However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (T-ESD) are still being debated. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of T-ESD for the treatment of superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library up to March 31, 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing T-ESD and conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. The main endpoints are en bloc resection, complete resection, procedure time, perforation, and delayed bleeding. Pooled risk ratio (RR), Peto odds ratio (OR), and mean difference (MD) were calculated to compare T-ESD and C-ESD. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018108135. RESULTS: A total of 7 RCTs with 1007 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the T-ESD and C-ESD groups in the pooled estimate of en bloc resection, complete resection, and delayed bleeding (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.99, 1.01, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.66; RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.98, 1.03, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.81; OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.48, 1.86, I(2) = 19%, P = 0.87,respectively). The pooled estimate indicated that the procedure time was significantly shorter in the T-ESD group (MD = − 16.19, 95% CI − 29.24, − 3.13, I(2) = 87%, P = 0.02) than in the C-ESD group. Compared to C-ESD, T-ESD was associated with lower incidence of perforation (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.11, 0.91, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: T-ESD is a safe and effective treatment option with a low perforation rate and shorter procedure time than C-ESD for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. Future multi-center (including European populations), randomized controlled trials of larger sample size and long-term outcomes of T-ESD are required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6549310
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65493102019-06-06 Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies Xia, Mengting Zhou, Yunfeng Yu, Jiajie Chen, Wenwen Huang, Xiaotao Liao, Juan World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: In recent years, some traction-assisted approaches have been introduced to facilitate endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures by reducing the procedure time and risks related to the procedure. However, the relative advantages of traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection (T-ESD) are still being debated. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of T-ESD for the treatment of superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library up to March 31, 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing T-ESD and conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. The main endpoints are en bloc resection, complete resection, procedure time, perforation, and delayed bleeding. Pooled risk ratio (RR), Peto odds ratio (OR), and mean difference (MD) were calculated to compare T-ESD and C-ESD. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018108135. RESULTS: A total of 7 RCTs with 1007 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the T-ESD and C-ESD groups in the pooled estimate of en bloc resection, complete resection, and delayed bleeding (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.99, 1.01, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.66; RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.98, 1.03, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.81; OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.48, 1.86, I(2) = 19%, P = 0.87,respectively). The pooled estimate indicated that the procedure time was significantly shorter in the T-ESD group (MD = − 16.19, 95% CI − 29.24, − 3.13, I(2) = 87%, P = 0.02) than in the C-ESD group. Compared to C-ESD, T-ESD was associated with lower incidence of perforation (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.11, 0.91, I(2) = 0%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: T-ESD is a safe and effective treatment option with a low perforation rate and shorter procedure time than C-ESD for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. Future multi-center (including European populations), randomized controlled trials of larger sample size and long-term outcomes of T-ESD are required. BioMed Central 2019-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6549310/ /pubmed/31164139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1639-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Xia, Mengting
Zhou, Yunfeng
Yu, Jiajie
Chen, Wenwen
Huang, Xiaotao
Liao, Juan
Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_full Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_fullStr Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_full_unstemmed Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_short Short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_sort short-term outcomes of traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6549310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31164139
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1639-z
work_keys_str_mv AT xiamengting shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT zhouyunfeng shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT yujiajie shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT chenwenwen shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT huangxiaotao shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT liaojuan shorttermoutcomesoftractionassistedversusconventionalendoscopicsubmucosaldissectionforsuperficialgastrointestinalneoplasmsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies