Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Clinical Endoscopy Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-29 DOI:10.5946/ce.2023.205
Talia F Malik, Vaishnavi Sabesan, Babu P Mohan, Asad Ur Rahman, Mohamed O Othman, Peter V Draganov, Gursimran S Kochhar
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Talia F Malik, Vaishnavi Sabesan, Babu P Mohan, Asad Ur Rahman, Mohamed O Othman, Peter V Draganov, Gursimran S Kochhar","doi":"10.5946/ce.2023.205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>In this meta-analysis, we studied the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multiple databases were searched, and studies were retrieved based on pre-specified criteria until October 2022. The outcomes assessed were resection rates, procedural complications, local recurrence, metachronous tumors, and the need for surgery after ESD in IBD. Standard meta-analysis methods were followed using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies comprising 291 dysplastic lesions in 274 patients were included with a median follow-up of 25 months. The pooled en-bloc resection, R0 resection, and curative resection rates were 92.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9%-95.4%; I2=0%), 81.5% (95% CI, 72.5%-88%; I2=43%), and 48.9% (95% CI, 32.1%-65.9%; I2=87%), respectively. The local recurrence rate was 3.9% (95% CI, 2%-7.5%; I2=0%). The pooled rates of bleeding and perforation were 7.7% (95% CI, 4.5%-13%; I2=10%) and 5.3% (95% CI, 3.1%-8.9%; I2=0%), respectively. The rates of metachronous recurrence and additional surgery following ESD were 10% (95% CI, 5.2%-18.2%; I2=55%) and 13% (95% CI, 8.5%-19.3%; I2=54%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ESD is safe and effective for the resection of dysplastic lesions in IBD with an excellent pooled rate of en-bloc and R0 resection.</p>","PeriodicalId":10351,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Endoscopy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11133987/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2023.205","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: In this meta-analysis, we studied the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Methods: Multiple databases were searched, and studies were retrieved based on pre-specified criteria until October 2022. The outcomes assessed were resection rates, procedural complications, local recurrence, metachronous tumors, and the need for surgery after ESD in IBD. Standard meta-analysis methods were followed using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity.

Results: Twelve studies comprising 291 dysplastic lesions in 274 patients were included with a median follow-up of 25 months. The pooled en-bloc resection, R0 resection, and curative resection rates were 92.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9%-95.4%; I2=0%), 81.5% (95% CI, 72.5%-88%; I2=43%), and 48.9% (95% CI, 32.1%-65.9%; I2=87%), respectively. The local recurrence rate was 3.9% (95% CI, 2%-7.5%; I2=0%). The pooled rates of bleeding and perforation were 7.7% (95% CI, 4.5%-13%; I2=10%) and 5.3% (95% CI, 3.1%-8.9%; I2=0%), respectively. The rates of metachronous recurrence and additional surgery following ESD were 10% (95% CI, 5.2%-18.2%; I2=55%) and 13% (95% CI, 8.5%-19.3%; I2=54%), respectively.

Conclusions: ESD is safe and effective for the resection of dysplastic lesions in IBD with an excellent pooled rate of en-bloc and R0 resection.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗炎症性肠病患者结直肠发育不良的有效性和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景/目的:在这项荟萃分析中,我们研究了内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)治疗炎症性肠病(IBD)患者结直肠发育不良的安全性和有效性:检索了多个数据库,并根据预先指定的标准检索了截至2022年10月的研究。评估的结果包括切除率、手术并发症、局部复发、并发肿瘤以及 IBD ESD 后的手术需求。采用随机效应模型进行标准荟萃分析,用I2%评估异质性:共纳入12项研究,包括274名患者的291个发育不良病灶,中位随访时间为25个月。汇总的全切率、R0切除率和根治性切除率分别为92.5%(95%置信区间[CI],87.9%-95.4%;I2=0%)、81.5%(95% CI,72.5%-88%;I2=43%)和48.9%(95% CI,32.1%-65.9%;I2=87%)。局部复发率为 3.9% (95% CI, 2%-7.5%; I2=0%)。出血和穿孔的汇总率分别为7.7%(95% CI,4.5%-13%;I2=10%)和5.3%(95% CI,3.1%-8.9%;I2=0%)。ESD后的远期复发率和额外手术率分别为10%(95% CI,5.2%-18.2%;I2=55%)和13%(95% CI,8.5%-19.3%;I2=54%):ESD对IBD增生异常病变的切除安全有效,全切率和R0切除率极高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Endoscopy
Clinical Endoscopy GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
95
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic vacuum therapy for gastrointestinal transmural defects: a literature review. Effectiveness of a novel ex vivo training model for gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection training: a prospective observational study conducted at a single center in Japan. Microbiological surveillance result of endoscopes after INTERCEPT Foam Spray: a quasi-experimental pilot study in Singapore. Technical challenges and safety of prophylactic gallbladder stenting with metallic biliary stenting. The impact of linked color imaging on adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1