H Y Wang1,2, X Zeng1,2, S Y Bai1,2, K Pu1,2, Y Zheng1,2, R Ji1,2, Q H Guo1,2, Q L Guan3, Y P Wang1,2, Y N Zhou1,2. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China. 2. Key Laboratory for Gastrointestinal Diseases of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China. 3. Department of Oncological Surgery, First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Oesophageal carcinoma is the sixth most lethal cancer in the world. At present, the choice of specific surgical methods is controversial. This study compares the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in treating early oesophageal carcinoma. METHODS: We carried out a search of online databases including the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library with no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were patients with early oesophageal carcinoma who accepted the treatment of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic mucosal resection. FINDINGS: A total of 1,462 patients with 1,650 lesions from nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with the endoscopic mucosal resection group, the en bloc resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 67.94% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 52.78%; odds ratio 19.79, p = 0.000) and complete resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 75.57% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 59.47%; odds ratio 16.10, p = 0.000) rates were significantly higher in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group, while the local recurrence rate was significantly lower in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group (endoscopic submucosal dissection 0.08% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 2.66%; odds ratio 0.08, p = 0.000). The incidence of complications and procedural time were also tested.
INTRODUCTION:Oesophageal carcinoma is the sixth most lethal cancer in the world. At present, the choice of specific surgical methods is controversial. This study compares the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in treating early oesophageal carcinoma. METHODS: We carried out a search of online databases including the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library with no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were patients with early oesophageal carcinoma who accepted the treatment of endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with endoscopic mucosal resection. FINDINGS: A total of 1,462 patients with 1,650 lesions from nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with the endoscopic mucosal resection group, the en bloc resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 67.94% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 52.78%; odds ratio 19.79, p = 0.000) and complete resection (endoscopic submucosal dissection 75.57% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 59.47%; odds ratio 16.10, p = 0.000) rates were significantly higher in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group, while the local recurrence rate was significantly lower in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group (endoscopic submucosal dissection 0.08% vs endoscopic mucosal resection 2.66%; odds ratio 0.08, p = 0.000). The incidence of complications and procedural time were also tested.
Authors: H Noguchi; Y Naomoto; H Kondo; M Haisa; T Yamatsuji; K Shigemitsu; H Aoki; H Isozaki; N Tanaka Journal: Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 1.719