Brewer Gutierrez Olaya I, Akshintala Venkata S, Ichkhanian Yervant, Brewer Gala G, Hanada Yuri, Truskey Maria P, Agarwal Amol, Hajiyeva Gulara, Kumbhari Vivek, Kalloo Anthony N, Khashab Mouen A, Ngamruengphong Saowanee
Division of Gastroenterology and hepatology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Department of Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore, Maryland, United States.
Endosc Int Open. 2020 Mar;8(3):E313-E325. doi: 10.1055/a-1073-7593. Epub 2020 Feb 21.
Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) allows for treatment of epithelial and sub-epithelial lesions (SELs) unsuitable to conventional resection techniques. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of clip-assisted method for non-exposed EFTR using FTRD or over-the-scope clip of gastrointestinal tumors. A comprehensive literature search was performed. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of histologic complete resection (R0). Secondary outcomes of interest were the rate of enbloc resection, FTR, adverse events, and post-EFTR surgery. Random-effects model was used to calculate pooled estimates and generate forest plots. Eighteen studies with 730 patients and 733 lesions were included in the analyses. Indications for EFTR were difficult/residual colorectal adenoma, adenoma at a diverticulum or appendiceal orifice and early cancer (n = 634), colorectal SELs (n = 42), and upper gastrointestinal lesions (n = 51), other colonic lesions (n = 6). Median size of lesions was 13.5 mm. There were 22 failed EFTR attempts. Pooled overall R0 resection rate was 82 % (95 % CI: 75, 89). The pooled overall FTR rate was 83 % (95 % CI: 77, 89). The pooled overall enbloc resection rate was 95 (95 % CI: 92, 96). The pooled estimates for perforation and bleeding were < 0.1 % and 2 %, respectively. Following EFTR, a total of 110 patients underwent surgery for any reason [pooled rate 7 % (95 % 2, 14). The pooled rates for post-EFTR surgery due to invasive cancer, for non-curative endoscopic resection and for adverse events were 4 %, < 0.1 % and < 0.1 %, respectively. No mortality related to EFTR was noted. EFTR appears to be safe and effective for gastrointestinal lesions that are not amenable to conventional endoscopic resection. This technique should be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected cases.
内镜全层切除术(EFTR)可用于治疗不适于传统切除技术的上皮和上皮下病变(SELs)。本荟萃分析旨在评估使用FTRD或套扎器对胃肠道肿瘤进行非暴露EFTR的夹辅助方法的疗效和安全性。进行了全面的文献检索。主要关注的结局是组织学完全切除率(R0)。次要关注的结局是整块切除率、全层切除率、不良事件和EFTR术后手术情况。采用随机效应模型计算合并估计值并生成森林图。分析纳入了18项研究,共730例患者和733个病变。EFTR的适应证包括困难/残留的结直肠腺瘤、憩室或阑尾开口处的腺瘤以及早期癌症(n = 634)、结直肠SELs(n = 42)、上消化道病变(n = 51)、其他结肠病变(n = 6)。病变的中位大小为13.5mm。有22次EFTR尝试失败。合并的总体R0切除率为82%(95%CI:75,89)。合并的总体全层切除率为83%(95%CI:77,89)。合并的总体整块切除率为95%(95%CI:92,96)。穿孔和出血的合并估计值分别<0.1%和2%。EFTR术后,共有110例患者因任何原因接受了手术[合并率7%(95%CI:2,14)]。因浸润性癌、非治愈性内镜切除和不良事件导致的EFTR术后手术合并率分别为4%、<0.1%和<0.1%。未观察到与EFTR相关的死亡。对于不适于传统内镜切除的胃肠道病变,EFTR似乎是安全有效的。在某些选定的病例中,该技术应被视为手术的替代方法。