Solutions for submucosal injection in endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:40
|
作者
Ferreira, Alexandre Oliveira [1 ]
Moleiro, Joana [2 ]
Torres, Joana [1 ]
Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Beatriz Angelo, Dept Gastroenterol, Ave Carlos Teixeira 3, P-2674514 Loures, Portugal
[2] Inst Portugues Oncol Lisboa, Dept Gastroenterol, Lisbon, Portugal
[3] Inst Portugues Oncol Porto, Dept Gastroenterol, Oporto, Portugal
[4] Univ Porto, Fac Med, CIDES CINTESIS, Rua Campo Alegre 823, P-4100 Oporto, Portugal
关键词
D O I
10.1055/s-0034-1393079
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and aims: Submucosal injection is standard practice in endoscopic mucosal resection of gastrointestinal lesions. Several solutions are used. Our aim was to systematically review their efficacy and safety. Patients and methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using a random effects model of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE. Studies in animal models were qualitatively assessed for efficacy and safety. Results: In total, 54 studies were qualitatively assessed. Eleven RCTs were analyzed, two of which were on endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The quantitative synthesis included nine RCTs on endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), comprising 792 subjects and 793 lesions. Mean lesion size was 20.9mm (range 8.5-46mm). A total of 209 lesions were randomized to sodium hyaluronate (SH) vs normal saline (NS), 72 to 50% dextrose (D50) vs NS, 82 to D50 vs SH, 43 to succinylated gelatin, 25 to hydroxyethyl starch and 36 to fibrinogen. In total, 385 were randomized to NS as controls. NS and SH are the best studied solutions and seem to be equally effective in achieving complete resection (OR 1.09; 95%CI 0.82, 1.45). No solution was proven to be superior in complete resection rate, post-polypectomy bleeding or coagulation syndrome/perforation incidence. Many solutions have been tested in animal studies and most seem more effective for mucosal elevation than NS. Conclusions: There are several solutions in clinical use and many more under research, but most are poorly studied. SH seems to be clinically equivalent to NS.There are no significant differences in post-polypectomy complications. Larger RCTs are needed to determine any small differences that may exist between solutions.
引用
收藏
页码:E1 / E16
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
    Shafique, Nouman
    Khan, Ali Raza
    Muhibullah, Fnu
    Zafar, Shahzad
    Qadeer, Abdul
    Shafique, Adeena
    Shafiq, Iqra
    Mohan, Babu
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 119 (10S): : S1135 - S1136
  • [32] Comparison of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Treatment of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Eggleston, Connor J.
    Claassen, Pierce L.
    Rangray, Rajani
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2022, 117 (10): : S833 - S834
  • [33] Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bang, Chang Seok
    Baik, Gwang Ho
    Shin, In Soo
    Suk, Ki Tae
    Yoon, Jai Hoon
    Kim, Dong Joon
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2016, 31 (05): : 860 - +
  • [34] Outcomes of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection vs Submucosal Tunneling Endoscopic Resection of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Ginnaram, Shravya
    Yarra, Pradeep
    Tahir, Dawood
    Kiwan, Wissam
    Cheesman, Antonio R.
    Kim, Marina
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 119 (10S): : S1143 - S1143
  • [35] Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis: Endoscopic and Surgical Resection for Ampullary Lesions
    Heise, Christian
    Abou Ali, Einas
    Hasenclever, Dirk
    Auriemma, Francesco
    Gulla, Aiste
    Regner, Sara
    Gaujoux, Sebastien
    Hollenbach, Marcus
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (11) : 1 - 26
  • [36] A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF ENDOSCOPIC AND SURGICAL RESECTION FOR AMPULLARY LESIONS
    Heise, C.
    Auriemma, F.
    Abou Ali, E.
    Hasencelever, D.
    Gulla, A.
    Regner, S.
    Gaujoux, S.
    Hollenbach, M.
    DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE, 2020, 52 : S5 - S6
  • [37] Endoscopic Resection of Sinonasal Inverted Papillomas: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Goudakos, John K.
    Blioskas, Sarantis
    Nikolaou, Angelos
    Vlachtsis, Konstantinos
    Karkos, Peter
    Markou, Konstantinos D.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RHINOLOGY & ALLERGY, 2018, 32 (03) : 167 - 174
  • [38] A systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection vs endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal sessile/non-polypoid lesions
    Shahini, Endrit
    Passera, Roberto
    Lo Secco, Giacomo
    Arezzo, Alberto
    MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERAPY & ALLIED TECHNOLOGIES, 2022, 31 (06) : 835 - 847
  • [39] Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs. endoscopic mucosal resection in the treatment of early Barrett's neoplasia: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Gallegos, Megui Marilia Mansilla
    Gomes, Igor Logetto Caetite
    Brunaldi, Vitor Ottoboni
    Bestetti, Alexandre Moraes
    Marques, Sergio Barbosa
    Miyajima, Nelson Tomio
    Filho, Hiram Menezes Nascimento
    da Silva, Pedro Henrique Veras Ayres
    Kum, Angelo So Taa
    Bernardo, Wanderley Marques
    de Moura, Eduardo Guimaraes Hourneaux
    DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2024,
  • [40] Endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for Barrett's-associated neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature
    Radadiya, Dhruvil
    Desai, Madhav
    Patel, Harsh
    Velji-Ibrahim, Jena
    Spadaccini, Marco
    Srinivasan, Sachin
    Khurana, Shruti
    Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva
    Perisetti, Abhilash
    Repici, Alessandro
    Hassan, Cesare
    Sharma, Prateek
    ENDOSCOPY, 2024,