Endoscopic closure technique performance for iatrogenic perforation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

iGIE Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-02 DOI:10.1016/j.igie.2026.01.015
Justin Buttar MD, Avni Jain MD, Shirley Jiang MD, Sunil Gupta MD, Hong Qian MSc, Roberto Trasolini MD, Sergei Vosko MD, Douglas Motomura MD, Eric Lam MD, Michael J. Bourke MBBS, Neal Shahidi MD, PhD
{"title":"Endoscopic closure technique performance for iatrogenic perforation: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Justin Buttar MD,&nbsp;Avni Jain MD,&nbsp;Shirley Jiang MD,&nbsp;Sunil Gupta MD,&nbsp;Hong Qian MSc,&nbsp;Roberto Trasolini MD,&nbsp;Sergei Vosko MD,&nbsp;Douglas Motomura MD,&nbsp;Eric Lam MD,&nbsp;Michael J. Bourke MBBS,&nbsp;Neal Shahidi MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.igie.2026.01.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><div>Perforation is the most feared endoscopy-related adverse event. Various closure techniques are available, including through-the-scope clips (TTSCs), over-the-scope clips (OTSCs), and over-the-scope suturing (OTSS). Given the lack of comparative performance estimates, we sought to systematically appraise TTSC, OTSC, and OTSS performance for iatrogenic perforation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>MEDLINE and Embase were independently searched between June 1947 and January 2024 for citations evaluating TTSC, OTSC, or OTSS performance. Technical success was defined as complete apposition of the borders of the defect with visual confirmation. Clinical success was defined as technical success without further intervention. Pooled estimates using random-effects modeling were generated and stratified by closure modality, location, perforation etiology, and time.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirty-seven citations assessing 795 perforations were included. Pooled technical and clinical success were 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9-94.1; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> = 26%) and 86.3% (95% CI, 81.9-89.8; <em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> = 39%). Technical success of TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS was 89.3% (95% CI, 82.6-93.6), 90.7% (95% CI, 86.0-93.9), and 94.9% (95% CI, 83.8-98.5; <em>P</em> = .53), respectively. Clinical success of TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS was 85.3% (95% CI, 77.9-90.6), 86.2% (95% CI, 80.4-90.5) and 94.9% (95% CI, 83.8-98.5) (<em>P</em> = .24). Clinical success was significantly higher for tissue resection–related perforations (<em>P</em> = .02) and perforations in the stomach (<em>P</em> &lt; .04); no difference in clinical success was identified when stratifying by closure modality and time (all <em>P</em> &gt; .05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS are effective for iatrogenic perforation management, especially in tissue resection–related perforations and perforations in the stomach. No difference in performance was identified on the basis of closure modality or time.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100652,"journal":{"name":"iGIE","volume":"5 3","pages":"Pages 457-469.e3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"iGIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S294970862600018X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims

Perforation is the most feared endoscopy-related adverse event. Various closure techniques are available, including through-the-scope clips (TTSCs), over-the-scope clips (OTSCs), and over-the-scope suturing (OTSS). Given the lack of comparative performance estimates, we sought to systematically appraise TTSC, OTSC, and OTSS performance for iatrogenic perforation.

Methods

MEDLINE and Embase were independently searched between June 1947 and January 2024 for citations evaluating TTSC, OTSC, or OTSS performance. Technical success was defined as complete apposition of the borders of the defect with visual confirmation. Clinical success was defined as technical success without further intervention. Pooled estimates using random-effects modeling were generated and stratified by closure modality, location, perforation etiology, and time.

Results

Thirty-seven citations assessing 795 perforations were included. Pooled technical and clinical success were 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9-94.1; I2 = 26%) and 86.3% (95% CI, 81.9-89.8; I2 = 39%). Technical success of TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS was 89.3% (95% CI, 82.6-93.6), 90.7% (95% CI, 86.0-93.9), and 94.9% (95% CI, 83.8-98.5; P = .53), respectively. Clinical success of TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS was 85.3% (95% CI, 77.9-90.6), 86.2% (95% CI, 80.4-90.5) and 94.9% (95% CI, 83.8-98.5) (P = .24). Clinical success was significantly higher for tissue resection–related perforations (P = .02) and perforations in the stomach (P < .04); no difference in clinical success was identified when stratifying by closure modality and time (all P > .05).

Conclusions

TTSCs, OTSCs, and OTSS are effective for iatrogenic perforation management, especially in tissue resection–related perforations and perforations in the stomach. No difference in performance was identified on the basis of closure modality or time.
内窥镜封闭技术治疗医源性穿孔:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
背景与目的内镜穿孔是最令人恐惧的内镜相关不良事件。有多种缝合技术可供选择,包括通过镜夹(TTSCs)、过镜夹(OTSCs)和过镜缝合(OTSS)。由于缺乏比较性能评估,我们试图系统地评估TTSC、OTSC和OTSS治疗医源性穿孔的性能。方法独立检索1947年6月至2024年1月间评价TTSC、OTSC或OTSS性能的文献。技术上的成功被定义为在视觉确认的情况下完全定位缺陷的边界。临床成功被定义为无需进一步干预的技术成功。使用随机效应模型进行汇总估计,并根据闭合方式、位置、穿孔病因和时间进行分层。结果共纳入37篇文献,评估795个穿孔。技术和临床总成功率分别为91.5%(95%可信区间[CI], 87.9-94.1; I2 = 26%)和86.3% (95% CI, 81.9-89.8; I2 = 39%)。TTSCs、OTSCs和OTSS的技术成功率分别为89.3% (95% CI, 82.6-93.6)、90.7% (95% CI, 86.0-93.9)和94.9% (95% CI, 83.8-98.5; P = 0.53)。TTSCs、OTSCs和OTSS的临床成功率分别为85.3% (95% CI, 77.9 ~ 90.6)、86.2% (95% CI, 80.4 ~ 90.5)和94.9% (95% CI, 83.8 ~ 98.5) (P = 0.24)。组织切除相关穿孔(P = 0.02)和胃穿孔(P < 0.04)的临床成功率明显更高;按闭合方式和时间分层时,临床成功率无差异(均P >; 0.05)。结论sttscs、OTSCs和OTSS对医源性穿孔的治疗效果较好,特别是对组织切除相关穿孔和胃穿孔的治疗效果更好。在关闭方式或时间的基础上,没有发现性能上的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书