Kim Eun Hye, Park Se Woo, Nam Eunwoo, Eun Chang Soo, Han Dong Soo, Park Chan Hyuk
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Institute of Gastroenterology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Guri, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Apr;32(4):756-768. doi: 10.1111/jgh.13623.
Although several studies have shown that second-look endoscopy does not affect the incidence of bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the potential roles of second-look endoscopy have not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to determine the role of second-look endoscopy after ESD through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This study conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through March 2016 using the keywords "second-look," "prophylactic hemostasis," "prophylactic haemostasis," "prevention," "prophylaxis," and "endoscopic submucosal dissection." Studies were included if they evaluated the incidence of post-ESD bleeding according to second-look endoscopy or prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy.
Four randomized controlled trials on post-ESD bleeding between second-look endoscopy and no second-look endoscopy and 12 non-randomized studies with a cohort design on post-ESD bleeding were included. On meta-analysis, second-look endoscopy did not affect delayed post-ESD bleeding (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.27 [0.80-2.00], I = 0%). During second-look endoscopy, patients who were considered as high-risk for post-ESD bleeding underwent prophylactic hemostasis. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who were treated with hemostasis during second-look endoscopy compared with those who were not (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 3.40 [1.87-6.18], I = 62%). In patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis, the number needed to prolong a hospitalization period to avoid one additional post-ESD bleeding after discharge was 25.
Second-look endoscopy after ESD could not reduce the risk of delayed post-ESD bleeding. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis than in those who did not.
尽管多项研究表明二次内镜检查不影响胃内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)后出血的发生率,但二次内镜检查的潜在作用尚未得到充分评估。本研究旨在通过系统评价和荟萃分析确定ESD后二次内镜检查的作用。
本研究于2016年3月前使用关键词“二次观察”“预防性止血”“预防性止血”“预防”“预防措施”和“内镜黏膜下剥离术”对MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆进行了系统的文献检索。如果研究根据二次内镜检查或二次内镜检查期间的预防性止血评估了ESD后出血的发生率,则纳入研究。
纳入了4项关于二次内镜检查与无二次内镜检查ESD后出血的随机对照试验,以及12项关于ESD后出血的队列设计的非随机研究。荟萃分析显示,二次内镜检查不影响ESD后延迟出血(优势比[95%置信区间]=1.27[0.80-2.00],I²=0%)。在二次内镜检查期间,被认为ESD后出血高危的患者接受了预防性止血。与未接受止血治疗的患者相比,在二次内镜检查期间接受止血治疗的患者ESD后延迟出血更为常见(优势比[95%置信区间]=3.40[1.87-6.18],I²=62%)。在接受预防性止血的患者中,出院后延长住院时间以避免一次额外的ESD后出血所需的人数为25人。
ESD后二次内镜检查不能降低ESD后延迟出血的风险。接受预防性止血的患者比未接受预防性止血的患者ESD后延迟出血更为常见。