Comparison of EMR versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett's neoplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Fujiyoshi, Yusuke [1 ,2 ]
Khalaf, Kareem [1 ]
He, Tony [1 ,3 ]
Tham, Daniel [1 ]
Yuan, Yuhong [4 ,5 ]
Calo, Natalia C. [1 ]
Grover, Samir C. [1 ]
Teshima, Christopher W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, St Michaels Hosp, Div Gastroenterol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Div Gastroenterol, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Melbourne, Fac Med Dent & Hlth Sci, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[4] London Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Med, London, ON, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Div Gastroenterol, Hamilton, ON, Canada
关键词
HIGH-GRADE DYSPLASIA; RESECTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.gie.2024.06.012
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Aims: EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are both accepted resection strategies for Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, a lack of consensus exists regarding which technique offers superior outcomes. This study aims to systematically review the evidence comparing EMR versus ESD in treating Barrett's neoplasia and EAC. Methods: We searched 3 databases (Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central) through October 2023. We included studies comparing the efficacy of EMR and ESD for Barrett's neoplasia and EAC. Primary outcomes include en bloc, R0, and curative resection; complete remission of dysplasia (CRD), and local recurrence. Secondary outcomes encompass adverse events. Results: Our search identified 905 records. Eleven studies were included in the final analyses. Data showed significantly higher en bloc resection rates with ESD (odds ratio [OR], 31.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.02-99.19; P < .01; 7 studies). R0 resection rates were significantly higher with ESD (OR, 5.92; 95% CI, 2.75-12.77; P < .01; 8 studies). Curative resection rates tended to be higher with ESD (OR, 3.49; 95% CI, 0.86-14.14; P = .080; 4 studies). There was no significant difference in CRD rates (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.37-2.26; P = .86; 3 studies). Local recurrence rates tended to be lower with ESD (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.11-1.04; P = .058; 10 studies). As for adverse events, there was no significant difference in bleeding, perforation, and postoperative stricture rates. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that ESD achieves higher en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates, with a tendency toward lower recurrence rates. These results suggest that ESD may be a more effective option for managing Barrett's neoplasia and EAC. (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] registration number: CRD42023426486.)
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection and EMR for early gastric cancer
    Lian, Jingjing
    Chen, Shiyao
    Zhang, Ying
    Qiu, Feng
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2012, 76 (04) : 763 - 770
  • [42] Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in the West: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Singh, Ritu Raj
    Nanavati, Julie
    Gopakumar, Harishankar
    Kumta, Nikhil A.
    ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, 2023, 11 (11) : E1082 - E1091
  • [43] Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the West: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Singh, Ritu R.
    Kumta, Nikhil A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2022, 117 (10): : S808 - S809
  • [44] Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Akintoye, Emmanuel
    Obaitan, Itegbemie
    Muthusamy, Arunkumar
    Akanbi, Olalekan
    Olusunmade, Mayowa
    Levine, Diane
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2016, 8 (15): : 517 - 532
  • [45] Underwater versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Singh, Sahib
    Mohan, Babu P.
    Vinayek, Rakesh
    Dutta, Sudhir
    Dahiya, Dushyant Singh
    Inamdar, Sumant
    Kumar, Vishnu Charan Suresh
    Aswath, Ganesh
    Sharma, Neil
    Adler, Douglas G.
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2025, 101 (03)
  • [46] ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION VERSUS ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION FOR BARRETT'S NEOPLASIA: A COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
    Sonaiya, Sneh
    Arayakarnkul, Suchapa
    Zhang, Linda
    Frick, Kevin
    Ngamruengphong, Saowanee
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2023, 97 (06) : AB974 - AB975
  • [47] Is endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection better than endoscopic submucosal dissection in treating large superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Liu, Huimin
    Zhang, Yueyi
    Wang, Yabing
    Pang, Ke
    Xi, Wenfeng
    Zou, Long
    He, Kun
    Wang, Qiang
    Huang, Liuye
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2025, 18
  • [48] Incidence rates of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Tan, J. L.
    Heng, K.
    Chinnaratha, A.
    Bulamu, N.
    Kaambwa, B.
    Singh, R.
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2023, 38 : 249 - 250
  • [49] Stent placement to prevent strictures after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhang, Bao-zhen
    Zhang, Yue
    Wang, Yi-dan
    Liao, Ye
    Zhang, Jing-jing
    Wu, Yu-fan
    Xiao, Ting-yue
    Sun, Si-yu
    Guo, Jin-tao
    DISEASES OF THE ESOPHAGUS, 2021, 34 (09)
  • [50] Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection
    Fujiya, Mikihiro
    Tanaka, Kazuyuki
    Dokoshi, Tatsuya
    Tominaga, Motoya
    Ueno, Nobuhiro
    Inaba, Yuhei
    Ito, Takahiro
    Moriichi, Kentaro
    Kohgo, Yutaka
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2015, 81 (03) : 583 - 595