Efficacy and safety of traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection: a meta-regression of randomized clinical trials

Author:

Su Ying-Fong12,Cheng Sheng-Wei3,Chang Chun Chao45,Kang Yi-No67

Affiliation:

1. School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

2. Department of Education, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

3. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

4. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

5. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

6. Institute of Health Behaviors and Community Sciences, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

7. Evidence-Based Medicine Center and Research Center of Big Data and Meta-analysis, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Republic of China (Taiwan)

Abstract

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used to treat gastrointestinal lesions. A traction-assisted (TA) strategy has been recently developed for ESD. In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of TA-ESD compared with conventional ESD (C-ESD). Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure to identify randomized clinical trials that compared TA-ESD and C-ESD. No filters for language or date of publication were used. Outcomes included complete resection rate, resected specimen size, procedure time, hemostasis usage (frequency), overall complication rate, perforation rate, and delayed bleeding rate. We used the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes in a random-effects model and Peto odds ratio (POR) for binary outcomes where any zero cell existed. Effect sizes and their 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were determined. Results 12 out of 929 identified articles, including 1499 patients, were analyzed. According to pooled results, TA-ESD produced similar R0 resections to C-ESD, but its procedure time (minutes) was shorter than that of C-ESD (MD – 16.02, 95 %CI – 22.71 to – 9.33). Moreover, TA-ESD had a lower complication rate (POR 0.47, 95 %CI 0.29 to 0.76) and perforation rate (POR 0.24, 95 %CI 0.10 to 0.56) than C-ESD. A nonsignificant difference in delayed bleeding rate was observed, although there was a trend toward this being lower in TA-ESD than C-ESD (POR 0.90, 95 %CI 0.46 to 1.75, I 2 = 12 %). Conclusions The traction-assisted strategy improves safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with ESD. However, we observed different effect sizes in the esophagus, stomach, and colorectum.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3