Cargando…

A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive endoscopic resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have revolutionized the management of peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. However, questions remain a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arif, A A, Donaldson, K, Qian, H, Lam, E, Shahidi, N C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859196/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.122
_version_ 1784654401965654016
author Arif, A A
Donaldson, K
Qian, H
Lam, E
Shahidi, N C
author_facet Arif, A A
Donaldson, K
Qian, H
Lam, E
Shahidi, N C
author_sort Arif, A A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive endoscopic resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have revolutionized the management of peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. However, questions remain about their comparative performance. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the performance of EMR, ESD and EFTR for peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: Two authors independently searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Libraries (Jan 2000 – Aug 2021) for citations evaluating the performance of endoscopic resection techniques (EMR, ESD, EFTR) for peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia (defined as those involving or in close proximity to the appendiceal orifice). The incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of technical success (complete removal of all neoplastic tissue at index procedure), clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding (CSPEB), delayed perforation, recurrence and referral to surgery were assessed using random-effects modelling. RESULTS: 12 studies were included in the analysis (479 patients: 185 EMR, 171 ESD, 123 EFTR). Technical success was achieved in 93.5% (95% CI 90.9%-95.4%, EMR 93.5%, ESD 94.1%, EFTR 92.7%). Clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding occurred in 1.3% (95% CI 0.4%-4.3%, EMR 3.8%, ESD 1.2%, EFTR 0%). Delayed perforation occurred in 1.9% (95% CI 0.9%-3.9%, EMR 0%, ESD 2.4%, EFTR 2.4%). Recurrence occurred in 5.7% (95% CI 2.3%-13.8%, EMR 14.3%, ESD 0.2%, EFTR 12.2–14.3%). Referral to surgery occurred in 9.0% (95% CI 6.7%-12.0%, EMR 8.1%, ESD 9.5%, EFTR 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive endoscopic resection techniques including EMR, ESD and EFTR demonstrate high frequencies of technical success with comparable adverse event profiles. They should now be viewed as first-line therapeutic modalities for the management of peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. FUNDING AGENCIES: None
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8859196
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88591962022-02-22 A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS Arif, A A Donaldson, K Qian, H Lam, E Shahidi, N C J Can Assoc Gastroenterol Poster of Distinction BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive endoscopic resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have revolutionized the management of peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. However, questions remain about their comparative performance. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the performance of EMR, ESD and EFTR for peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. METHODS: Two authors independently searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Libraries (Jan 2000 – Aug 2021) for citations evaluating the performance of endoscopic resection techniques (EMR, ESD, EFTR) for peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia (defined as those involving or in close proximity to the appendiceal orifice). The incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of technical success (complete removal of all neoplastic tissue at index procedure), clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding (CSPEB), delayed perforation, recurrence and referral to surgery were assessed using random-effects modelling. RESULTS: 12 studies were included in the analysis (479 patients: 185 EMR, 171 ESD, 123 EFTR). Technical success was achieved in 93.5% (95% CI 90.9%-95.4%, EMR 93.5%, ESD 94.1%, EFTR 92.7%). Clinically significant post-endoscopic resection bleeding occurred in 1.3% (95% CI 0.4%-4.3%, EMR 3.8%, ESD 1.2%, EFTR 0%). Delayed perforation occurred in 1.9% (95% CI 0.9%-3.9%, EMR 0%, ESD 2.4%, EFTR 2.4%). Recurrence occurred in 5.7% (95% CI 2.3%-13.8%, EMR 14.3%, ESD 0.2%, EFTR 12.2–14.3%). Referral to surgery occurred in 9.0% (95% CI 6.7%-12.0%, EMR 8.1%, ESD 9.5%, EFTR 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive endoscopic resection techniques including EMR, ESD and EFTR demonstrate high frequencies of technical success with comparable adverse event profiles. They should now be viewed as first-line therapeutic modalities for the management of peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia. FUNDING AGENCIES: None Oxford University Press 2022-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8859196/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.122 Text en ڣ The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Poster of Distinction
Arif, A A
Donaldson, K
Qian, H
Lam, E
Shahidi, N C
A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title_full A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title_fullStr A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title_full_unstemmed A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title_short A123 MINIMALLY INVASIVE ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION TECHNIQUE PERFORMANCE FOR PERI-APPENDICEAL COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
title_sort a123 minimally invasive endoscopic resection technique performance for peri-appendiceal colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Poster of Distinction
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859196/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.122
work_keys_str_mv AT arifaa a123minimallyinvasiveendoscopicresectiontechniqueperformanceforperiappendicealcolorectalneoplasiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT donaldsonk a123minimallyinvasiveendoscopicresectiontechniqueperformanceforperiappendicealcolorectalneoplasiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT qianh a123minimallyinvasiveendoscopicresectiontechniqueperformanceforperiappendicealcolorectalneoplasiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lame a123minimallyinvasiveendoscopicresectiontechniqueperformanceforperiappendicealcolorectalneoplasiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shahidinc a123minimallyinvasiveendoscopicresectiontechniqueperformanceforperiappendicealcolorectalneoplasiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis