Safety and Efficacy of Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection of Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions Using a Full Thickness Resection Device: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Journal
Journal of clinical gastroenterology
ISSN: 1539-2031
Titre abrégé: J Clin Gastroenterol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7910017
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2024
01 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
18
03
2022
accepted:
17
10
2022
pubmed:
3
2
2023
medline:
3
2
2023
entrez:
2
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is a promising technique that allows for a minimally invasive resection of mucosal and submucosal lesions in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The data regarding the efficacy and safety of performing EFTR of upper GI lesions using a full-thickness resection device (FTRD) is limited. Hence, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies that evaluated this technique. We performed a comprehensive systematic search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings that reported outcomes of EFTR using the FTRD system. The weighted pooled rates of technical success, complete (R0) resection, adverse events (AE), and residual or recurrent lesions were analyzed with 95% CI using the random effects model. Eight studies with a total of 139 patients who underwent EFTR of upper GI lesions were included in the study. The pooled, weighted rate of technical success was 88.2% (95% CI: 81.4-92.7%, I2 : 0). The R0 resection rate was 70.7% (95% CI: 62.5-77.8%, I2 : 0). Overall AE rates were 22.1% (95% CI: 15.8-30.1%, I2 : 0), however, most of the AEs were minor. Of the patients who had follow-up endoscopies, the residual and/or recurrent lesion rate was 6.1% (95% CI: 2.4-14.4%, I2 : 0). Heterogeneity in the analysis was low. EFTR using the FTRD seems to be effective and safe with acceptable R0 resection rates and low recurrence rates. Further prospective studies are required to validate our results and to compare various modalities of endoscopic resection with this single-step EFTR device.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36730483
doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001803
pii: 00004836-990000000-00102
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
46-52Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Hoffman A, Atreya R, Rath T, et al. Current endoscopic resection techniques for gastrointestinal lesions: endoscopic mucosal resection, submucosal dissection, and full-thickness resection. Visc Med. 2021;37:358–371.
Maple JT, Abu Dayyeh BK, Chauhan SS, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1311–1325.
Rajan E, Wong Kee Song LM. Endoscopic full thickness resection. Gastroenterology. 2018;154:1925–1937.
Schmidt A, Beyna T, Schumacher B, et al. Colonoscopic full-thickness resection using an over-the-scope device: a prospective multicentre study in various indications. Gut. 2018;67:1280–1289.
Dolan RD, Bazarbashi AN, McCarty TR, et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022;95:216–224.e18. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34627794/ . Accessed December 23, 2021.
Meier B, Stritzke B, Kuellmer A, et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection in the colorectum: results from the German Colonic FTRD Registry. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115:1998–2006.
Higgins JP. The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Available at: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org ; Available at: https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/20000796633 . Accessed December 16, 2020.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010;8:336–41.
Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available at: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp . Accessed March 9, 2021.
Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L, et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:446–454.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1294–1302.
Schmidt A, Meier B, Cahyadi O, et al. Duodenal endoscopic full-thickness resection (with video). Gastrointest Endos. 2015;82:728–733.
Andrisani G, Di Matteo FM. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of duodenal lesions (with video). Surg Endosc. 2020;34:1876–1881.
Bauder M, Schmidt A, Caca K. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of duodenal lesions-a retrospective analysis of 20 FTRD cases. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2018;6:1015–1021.
Hajifathalian K, Ichkhanian Y, Dawod Q, et al. Full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for treatment of upper gastrointestinal tract lesions: the first international experience. Endosc Int open. 2020;8:E1291–E1301.
Meier B, Schmidt A, Glaser N, et al. Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric subepithelial tumors with the gFTRD-system: a prospective pilot study (RESET trial). Surg Endosc. 2020;34:853–860.
Yuen PYS, Vareedayah AA, Morales SJ, et al. ID: 3522576 efficacy and safety of full thickness resection (FTR) in the upper gastrointestinal tract (UGIT): a single center North American experience. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93:AB176.
Boger P, Hayee B, Gulati S, et al. P14 Initial UK experience in use of the gastroduodenal full thickness resection device. Gut. 2021;70(Suppl_1):A48–A49.
Nilsson J-E, Koch AD, Graaf W de. ID: 3522485 endoscopic full-thickness resection of upper gastrointestinal lesions using a colonic FTRD—a retrospective observational case series of 13 FTRD cases. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93:AB338.
Cao Y, Liao C, Tan A, et al. Meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 2009;41:751–757.
Yamamoto Y, Kikuchi D, Nagami Y, et al. Management of adverse events related to endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms: review of the literature and recommendations from experts. Dig Endosc. 2019;31(Suppl_1):4–20.
Fahmawi Y, Hanjar A, Ahmed Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for colorectal lesions endoscopic full-thickness resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2021;55:e27–e36.
Ngamruengphong S, Ferri L, Aihara H, et al. Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastric neoplasia in a large cohort in North America. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;19:1611–1619.
Draganov PV, Wang AY, Othman MO, et al. AGA institute clinical practice update: endoscopic submucosal dissection in the United States. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;17:16–25.
Falt P, Zapletalová J, Urban O. Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of colonic neoplastic lesions ≤ 30 mm—a single-center experience. Surg Endosc. 2021;1:1–8.