School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo First Hospital, Zhejiang, China.
Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Zhejiang, China.
Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2021 Nov-Dec;27(6):331-341. doi: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_21.
We performed a systematic review and pooled analysis to assess the effectiveness and safety of different endoscopic resection methods for 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps.
Articles in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library related to the common endoscopic treatment of 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated polyps published as of April 2020 were searched. Primary outcomes were the R0 resection rate and en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were safety and the recurrence rate. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were also performed.
A total of 36 studies involving 3212 polyps were included in the final analysis. Overall, the effectiveness of resection methods with a submucosal uplifting effect, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold EMR and underwater EMR (UEMR), was better than that of methods without a nonsubmucosal uplifting effect [R0 resection rate, 90% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.94, I = 84%) vs 82% (95% CI 0.78-0.85, I = 0%); en bloc resection rate 85% (95% CI 0.79-0.91, I = 83%) vs 74% (95% CI 0.47-0.94, I = 94%)]. Regarding safety, the pooled data showed that hot resection [hot snare polypectomy, UEMR and EMR] had a higher risk of intraprocedural bleeding than cold resection [3% (95% CI 0.01-0.05, I = 68%) vs 0% (95% CI 0-0.01, I = 0%)], while the incidences of delayed bleeding, perforation and post-polypectomy syndrome were all low.
Methods with submucosal uplifting effects are more effective than those without for resecting 10- to 20-mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps, and cold EMR is associated with a lower risk of intraprocedural bleeding than other methods. Additional research is needed to verify the advantages of these methods, especially cold EMR.
我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估 10-20mm 无蒂结直肠息肉的不同内镜切除方法的有效性和安全性。
检索截至 2020 年 4 月发表的关于 10-20mm 无蒂息肉的常见内镜治疗的 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆中的文章。主要结局为 R0 切除率和整块切除率。次要结局为安全性和复发率。还进行了元回归和亚组分析。
共有 36 项研究,涉及 3212 个息肉,最终纳入分析。总体而言,具有黏膜下抬举作用的切除方法(包括内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)、冷 EMR 和水下 EMR(UEMR))的效果优于无黏膜下抬举作用的方法[R0 切除率 90%(95%置信区间(CI)0.81-0.94,I = 84%)比 82%(95%CI 0.78-0.85,I = 0%);整块切除率 85%(95%CI 0.79-0.91,I = 83%)比 74%(95%CI 0.47-0.94,I = 94%)]。关于安全性,汇总数据显示,热切除[热圈套息肉切除术、UEMR 和 EMR]术中出血风险高于冷切除[3%(95%CI 0.01-0.05,I = 68%)比 0%(95%CI 0-0.01,I = 0%)],而迟发性出血、穿孔和息肉切除后综合征的发生率均较低。
具有黏膜下抬举作用的方法比无黏膜下抬举作用的方法更有效地切除 10-20mm 无蒂结直肠息肉,冷 EMR 与其他方法相比,术中出血风险较低。需要进一步的研究来验证这些方法的优势,特别是冷 EMR。