Suppr超能文献

预防性夹闭在结直肠内镜切除术中的作用:一项随机对照研究的荟萃分析。

Effect of prophylactic clipping in colorectal endoscopic resection: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.

作者信息

Nishizawa Toshihiro, Suzuki Hidekazu, Goto Osamu, Ogata Haruhiko, Kanai Takanori, Yahagi Naohisa

机构信息

Division of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

United European Gastroenterol J. 2017 Oct;5(6):859-867. doi: 10.1177/2050640616687837. Epub 2017 Jan 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The efficacy of clipping for preventing delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic resection is still controversial. To assess the efficacy of prophylactic clipping, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the Igaku-chuo-zasshi database for randomized trials eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. We identified seven eligible randomized trials from the database search, and compared the effect of clipping versus non-clipping with respect to delayed bleeding and perforation. Data from eligible studies were combined to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Postoperative bleeding was observed in 41 of 1526 cases (2.7%) without clipping and in 32 of 1533 cases (2.1%) with clipping (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.39-1.47,  = 0.414). There was no significant heterogeneity among the trial results (I-Square = 26.7%,  = 0.22). In the subgroup analysis based on small tumor size (<20 mm) and large tumor size (≥20 mm), there were no significant differences. Compared with non-clipping, the pooled OR of developing perforation with clipping was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.14-7.25), indicating no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping did not decrease the occurrence of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic resection. Clipping could be of interest in patients with a high risk of bleeding (anticoagulation) or large lesions, but with the available trials data to prove this are scarce.

摘要

背景与目的

结直肠内镜切除术后预防性夹闭预防迟发性出血的疗效仍存在争议。为评估预防性夹闭的疗效,我们进行了一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

方法

我们检索了PubMed、Cochrane图书馆和《医学中央杂志》数据库,以查找符合纳入我们荟萃分析条件的随机试验。我们从数据库检索中确定了7项符合条件的随机试验,并比较了夹闭与未夹闭在迟发性出血和穿孔方面的效果。合并符合条件研究的数据以计算合并比值比(OR)。

结果

1526例未进行夹闭的患者中有41例(2.7%)发生术后出血,1533例进行夹闭的患者中有32例(2.1%)发生术后出血(OR 0.76,95%CI:0.39 - 1.47,P = 0.414)。试验结果之间无显著异质性(I² = 26.7%,P = 0.22)。在基于小肿瘤大小(<20mm)和大肿瘤大小(≥20mm)的亚组分析中,无显著差异。与未夹闭相比,夹闭后发生穿孔的合并OR为1.00(95%CI:0.14 - 7.25),表明两组之间无显著差异。

结论

预防性夹闭并未降低结直肠内镜切除术后迟发性出血的发生率。对于出血风险高(抗凝治疗)或病变较大的患者,夹闭可能是有意义的,但现有试验数据尚不足以证明这一点。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Dual Channel Endoscopic Mucosal Resection.双通道内镜黏膜切除术
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2023 Jul 17;37(5):295-301. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1770943. eCollection 2024 Sep.
5
Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection.在内镜黏膜切除术中实现高质量切除。
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2023 May 16;15(5):338-353. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v15.i5.338.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验