J J Lian1, S Y Chen, P H Zhou, Y Q Zhang. 1. Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 20032, China.
Abstract
Objective: To use the meta-analysis in evaluating the hemorrhage-prevention value of second-look endoscopy after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer. Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies comparing second-look endoscopy and non-second-look endoscopy after gastric ESD. The Medline/PubMed, Ovid, Elsevier ScienceDirect, EBSCO, CNKI and VIP databases were searched systematically. Literature inclusion criteria: (1) all the patients were diagnosed as early gastric cancer receiving ESD; (2) end point of the study included postoperative bleeding rate of ESD. Exclusion criteria: (1) papers of repeated research, review, comment, guideline, etc; (2) non-control study. Meta-analysis method was used to calculate a pooled odds ratio (OR) for developing post-ESD bleeding. Results: The meta-analysis showed that post-ESD bleeding was observed in 40 of 1287 patients (3.1%) without second-look endoscopy and in 40 of 968 patients (4.1%) with second- look endoscopy (OR=1.25, 95% CI: 0.79-1.98), with no significant difference between these two groups. Subgroup analysis on research method still indicated no significant difference of post-ESD bleeding between RCT group (OR=1.45,95%CI: 0.79-2.65) and non-RCT group (OR=1.02, 95%CI: 0.50-2.08) (all P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on meta analysis, second-look endoscopy can not reduce the rate of postoperative bleeding of ESD. Therefore, routine second-look endoscopy after gastric ESD may not be necessary to prevent delayed postoperative bleeding of ESD.
Objective: To use the meta-analysis in evaluating the hemorrhage-prevention value of second-look endoscopy after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer. Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies comparing second-look endoscopy and non-second-look endoscopy after gastric ESD. The Medline/PubMed, Ovid, Elsevier ScienceDirect, EBSCO, CNKI and VIP databases were searched systematically. Literature inclusion criteria: (1) all the patients were diagnosed as early gastric cancer receiving ESD; (2) end point of the study included postoperative bleeding rate of ESD. Exclusion criteria: (1) papers of repeated research, review, comment, guideline, etc; (2) non-control study. Meta-analysis method was used to calculate a pooled odds ratio (OR) for developing post-ESD bleeding. Results: The meta-analysis showed that post-ESD bleeding was observed in 40 of 1287 patients (3.1%) without second-look endoscopy and in 40 of 968 patients (4.1%) with second- look endoscopy (OR=1.25, 95% CI: 0.79-1.98), with no significant difference between these two groups. Subgroup analysis on research method still indicated no significant difference of post-ESD bleeding between RCT group (OR=1.45,95%CI: 0.79-2.65) and non-RCT group (OR=1.02, 95%CI: 0.50-2.08) (all P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on meta analysis, second-look endoscopy can not reduce the rate of postoperative bleeding of ESD. Therefore, routine second-look endoscopy after gastric ESD may not be necessary to prevent delayed postoperative bleeding of ESD.