Eun Hye Kim1, Se Woo Park2, Eunwoo Nam3, Chang Soo Eun4, Dong Soo Han4, Chan Hyuk Park4. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Institute of Gastroenterology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Guri, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. 3. Biostatistics Consulting and Research Lab, Medical Research Coordinating center, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Guri, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although several studies have shown that second-look endoscopy does not affect the incidence of bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the potential roles of second-look endoscopy have not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to determine the role of second-look endoscopy after ESD through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: This study conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through March 2016 using the keywords "second-look," "prophylactic hemostasis," "prophylactic haemostasis," "prevention," "prophylaxis," and "endoscopic submucosal dissection." Studies were included if they evaluated the incidence of post-ESD bleeding according to second-look endoscopy or prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials on post-ESD bleeding between second-look endoscopy and no second-look endoscopy and 12 non-randomized studies with a cohort design on post-ESD bleeding were included. On meta-analysis, second-look endoscopy did not affect delayed post-ESD bleeding (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.27 [0.80-2.00], I2 = 0%). During second-look endoscopy, patients who were considered as high-risk for post-ESD bleeding underwent prophylactic hemostasis. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who were treated with hemostasis during second-look endoscopy compared with those who were not (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 3.40 [1.87-6.18], I2 = 62%). In patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis, the number needed to prolong a hospitalization period to avoid one additional post-ESD bleeding after discharge was 25. CONCLUSION: Second-look endoscopy after ESD could not reduce the risk of delayed post-ESD bleeding. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis than in those who did not.
BACKGROUND: Although several studies have shown that second-look endoscopy does not affect the incidence of bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the potential roles of second-look endoscopy have not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to determine the role of second-look endoscopy after ESD through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: This study conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through March 2016 using the keywords "second-look," "prophylactic hemostasis," "prophylactic haemostasis," "prevention," "prophylaxis," and "endoscopic submucosal dissection." Studies were included if they evaluated the incidence of post-ESD bleeding according to second-look endoscopy or prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials on post-ESD bleeding between second-look endoscopy and no second-look endoscopy and 12 non-randomized studies with a cohort design on post-ESD bleeding were included. On meta-analysis, second-look endoscopy did not affect delayed post-ESD bleeding (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.27 [0.80-2.00], I2 = 0%). During second-look endoscopy, patients who were considered as high-risk for post-ESD bleeding underwent prophylactic hemostasis. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who were treated with hemostasis during second-look endoscopy compared with those who were not (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 3.40 [1.87-6.18], I2 = 62%). In patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis, the number needed to prolong a hospitalization period to avoid one additional post-ESD bleeding after discharge was 25. CONCLUSION: Second-look endoscopy after ESD could not reduce the risk of delayed post-ESD bleeding. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was more common in patients who underwent prophylactic hemostasis than in those who did not.
Authors: Nienke Z Borren; Hamed Khalili; Jay Luther; Francis P Colizzo; John J Garber; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Joseph Jy Sung; Philip Wy Chiu; Francis K L Chan; James Yw Lau; Khean-Lee Goh; Lawrence Hy Ho; Hwoon-Young Jung; Jose D Sollano; Takuji Gotoda; Nageshwar Reddy; Rajvinder Singh; Kentaro Sugano; Kai-Chun Wu; Chun-Yin Wu; David J Bjorkman; Dennis M Jensen; Ernst J Kuipers; Angel Lanas Journal: Gut Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 23.059