Suppr超能文献

冷圈套息肉切除术联合或不联合黏膜下注射用于结直肠息肉内镜切除:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Cold Snare Polypectomy With or Without Submucosal Injection for Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Polyps: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, 37 Guo Xue Lane, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sichuan University-Oxford University Huaxi Gastrointestinal Cancer Centre, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.

出版信息

Dig Dis Sci. 2024 Apr;69(4):1411-1420. doi: 10.1007/s10620-024-08353-5. Epub 2024 Feb 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The impact of submucosal injection during cold snare polypectomy (CSP) remains uncertain. We conducted an evidence-based comparison of conventional CSP (C-CSP) and CSP with submucosal injection (SI-CSP) for colorectal polyp resection.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing C-CSP with SI-CSP. Major outcomes included the rates of complete resection, en bloc resection, polyp retrieval, and adverse events, as well as the duration of polypectomy. Data were analyzed by using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of seven RCTs were included. Complete resection rates for all polyps (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.93-1.03), polyps ≤ 10 mm (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96-1.02) and polyps > 10 mm (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.69-1.12) were not substantially different between C-CSP and SI-CSP groups. En bloc resection rate (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.79-1.09) and polyp retrieval rate (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99-1.01) were also not significantly different between the two groups. The SI-CSP group required a prolonged polypectomy time than the C-CSP group (SMD - 0.89; 95% CI -1.29 to -0.49). Adverse events were rare in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SI-CSP is not an optimal substitute for CSP in the resection of colorectal polyps, particularly diminutive and small polyps.

摘要

背景和目的

黏膜下注射在冷圈套息肉切除术(CSP)中的影响仍不确定。我们对常规 CSP(C-CSP)和黏膜下注射辅助 CSP(SI-CSP)治疗结直肠息肉切除进行了基于证据的比较。

方法

检索 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库,以比较 C-CSP 与 SI-CSP 的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局包括完全切除率、整块切除率、息肉取出率和不良事件发生率,以及息肉切除术的持续时间。采用随机效应模型进行数据分析。

结果

共纳入 7 项 RCT。所有息肉(RR 0.98;95%CI 0.93-1.03)、 ≤ 10 mm 息肉(RR 0.99;95%CI 0.96-1.02)和 > 10 mm 息肉(RR 0.92;95%CI 0.69-1.12)的完全切除率在 C-CSP 和 SI-CSP 组之间无显著差异。整块切除率(RR 0.93;95%CI 0.79-1.09)和息肉取出率(RR 1.00;95%CI 0.99-1.01)也无显著差异。SI-CSP 组的息肉切除术时间长于 C-CSP 组(SMD -0.89;95%CI -1.29 至 -0.49)。两组不良事件均少见。

结论

SI-CSP 不是 CSP 切除结直肠息肉的理想替代方法,尤其是微小和小息肉。

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