Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cold Versus Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Sessile Serrated Colorectal Polyps ≥10 mm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Malik, Talia F; Mohan, Babu P; Deliwala, Smit; Kassab, Lena L; Chandan, Saurabh; Sharma, Neil R; Adler, Douglas G.
Afiliação
  • Malik TF; Department of Internal Medicine, Chicago Medical School at Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL.
  • Mohan BP; Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT.
  • Deliwala S; Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
  • Kassab LL; Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
  • Chandan S; Department of Gastroenterology, CHI Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, NE.
  • Sharma NR; Department of Gastroenterology, Parkview Cancer Institute, Fort Wayne, IN.
  • Adler DG; Department of Gastroenterology, Center for Advanced Therapeutic Endoscopy (CATE), Centura Health, Porter Adventist Hospital, Denver, CO.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 2023 Nov 29.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38019045
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis studying the efficacy and safety of cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥10 mm.

METHODS:

Multiple databases were searched until January 2023 for studies reporting outcomes of cold versus hot EMR for SSPs ≥10 mm. The primary outcome was the residual SSP rate. Secondary outcomes included technical success rate, R0 resection rate, and adverse events. We used standard meta-analysis methods using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS:

Thirteen studies were included in the final analysis. In all, 1896 SSPs were included with a mean polyp size of 23.7 mm (range, 15.9 to 33). A total of 1452 SSPs were followed up for a median follow-up duration of 15.3 months (range, 6 to 37). The pooled residual SSP rate for cold EMR was 4.5% (95% CI 1.0-17.4), and 5.1% (95% CI 2.4-10.4) for hot EMR (P=0.9). The pooled rates of technical success, R0 resection, immediate bleeding, and perforation were comparable. Hot EMR was significantly associated with lower piecemeal resection (59.2% vs. 99.3%, P<0.001), higher en-bloc resection (41.4% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001), and delayed bleeding rate (4% vs. 0.7%, P=0.05) compared to cold EMR.

CONCLUSIONS:

Cold EMR has similar efficacy compared to hot EMR for resection of SSP ≥ 10 mm, despite limitations in piecemeal R0 resection rate reporting. Although hot EMR was associated with a higher rate of en-bloc resection, it also showed an increased risk of delayed bleeding compared to cold EMR.

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Gastroenterol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Gastroenterol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article