BACKGROUND Endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries,while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection(EM...BACKGROUND Endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries,while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)is preferred is still debatable.AIM To compare the surgical,histological,and oncological outcomes between ESD and EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps,with subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of ESD and EMR between Japan and the rest of the world.METHODS Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to October 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing en bloc,complete resection,margin involvement,resection time,need for additional surgery,complications,and recurrence rate of ESD with EMR.RESULTS Of 281344 colorectal polyps from 21 studies were included.When compared to EMR,the pooled analysis revealed ESD was associated with higher en bloc and complete resection rate,and lower lateral margin involvement and recurrence.ESD led to increased procedural time,need for additional surgery,and perforation risk.No significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the two groups.Meta-regression analysis suggested only right colonic polyps correlated with an increased perforation risk in ESD.Confounders including polyp size and invasion depth did not significantly influence the en bloc and complete resection rate,bleeding risk and recurrence.In subgroup analysis,Japan performed better than the rest of the world in both ESD and EMR with perforation risk of 4%and 0.0002%,respectively,as compared to perforation risk of 8%and 1%,respectively,in reports coming from rest of the world.CONCLUSION ESD resulted in better resection outcomes and lower recurrence compared to EMR.With appropriate training,ESD is preferred over EMR as the first-line therapy for resection of colorectal polyps,without restricting to lesions greater than 20 mm and those with high suspicion of submucosal invasion.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)has shown to be effective in management of colorectal neoplasm in the Asian countries,while its implementation in Western countries where endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)is preferred is still debatable.AIM To compare the surgical,histological,and oncological outcomes between ESD and EMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps,with subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of ESD and EMR between Japan and the rest of the world.METHODS Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to October 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing en bloc,complete resection,margin involvement,resection time,need for additional surgery,complications,and recurrence rate of ESD with EMR.RESULTS Of 281344 colorectal polyps from 21 studies were included.When compared to EMR,the pooled analysis revealed ESD was associated with higher en bloc and complete resection rate,and lower lateral margin involvement and recurrence.ESD led to increased procedural time,need for additional surgery,and perforation risk.No significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the two groups.Meta-regression analysis suggested only right colonic polyps correlated with an increased perforation risk in ESD.Confounders including polyp size and invasion depth did not significantly influence the en bloc and complete resection rate,bleeding risk and recurrence.In subgroup analysis,Japan performed better than the rest of the world in both ESD and EMR with perforation risk of 4%and 0.0002%,respectively,as compared to perforation risk of 8%and 1%,respectively,in reports coming from rest of the world.CONCLUSION ESD resulted in better resection outcomes and lower recurrence compared to EMR.With appropriate training,ESD is preferred over EMR as the first-line therapy for resection of colorectal polyps,without restricting to lesions greater than 20 mm and those with high suspicion of submucosal invasion.
