Safety and Efficacy of Powered Non-Thermal Endoscopic Resection Device for Removal of Colonic Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Gastroenterology Research Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-21 DOI:10.14740/gr1638
Zohaib Ahmed, Daryl Ramai, Nooraldin Merza, Joyce Badal, Umair Iqbal, Syeda F Arif, Alsadiq Al-Hillan, Tony Varughese, Wade Lee-Smith, Ali Nawras, Yaseen Alastal, Harshit S Khara, Bradley D Confer, David L Diehl, Douglas G Adler
{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Powered Non-Thermal Endoscopic Resection Device for Removal of Colonic Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Zohaib Ahmed, Daryl Ramai, Nooraldin Merza, Joyce Badal, Umair Iqbal, Syeda F Arif, Alsadiq Al-Hillan, Tony Varughese, Wade Lee-Smith, Ali Nawras, Yaseen Alastal, Harshit S Khara, Bradley D Confer, David L Diehl, Douglas G Adler","doi":"10.14740/gr1638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic mucosal resection is a frequently employed method for removing colonic polyps. Nonetheless, the recurrence of these polyps over a healed submucosal base can complicate the extraction of leftover lesions through standard procedures. EndoRotor<sup>®</sup>, a non-thermal device specifically designed for endoscopic mucosal resection, has recently been assessed for its utility in removing colonic polyps, non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, and pancreatic necrosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the safety and efficacy of EndoRotor<sup>®</sup> in resecting scared or recurrence colonic polyps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an exhaustive review of existing literature using databases such as Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until January 2023. Our aim was to find all studies that assessed the safety of non-thermal endoscopic resection devices in removing colonic polyps. The primary outcome we focused on was the rate of technical success. Secondary outcomes that we considered included the frequency of remaining lesions and instances of adverse events. To analyze these data, we used comprehensive meta-analysis software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis incorporated three studies comprising 54 patients who underwent resection of 60 lesions. The combined technical success rate was 93.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 77.7-98.6%, I<sup>2</sup> = 25.5%). In patients who had another endoscopic examination, 20 were found to have a residual lesion. After the initial session, the combined rate of remaining lesions was 39.8% (95% CI: 15.3-70.8%, I<sup>2</sup> = 74.5%). There were eight occurrences of intraoperative bleeding and four instances of bleeding post-procedure. The combined rate of intraoperative bleeding was 13.2% (95% CI: 6.7-24.3%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), and post-procedure bleeding stood at 8.5% (95% CI: 3.4-19.8%, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Only one major bleeding event was recorded, and no cases of perforation were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our research indicates that the EndoRotor<sup>®</sup> effectively removes scarred colonic polyps, though the rate of remaining lesions is significant, potentially necessitating several sessions for a thorough removal. There is a need for broader prospective studies, mainly randomized controlled trials, to further assess EndoRotor<sup>®</sup>'s efficiency and safety in eliminating colonic polyps.</p>","PeriodicalId":12461,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Research","volume":"16 5","pages":"254-261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10627355/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1638","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection is a frequently employed method for removing colonic polyps. Nonetheless, the recurrence of these polyps over a healed submucosal base can complicate the extraction of leftover lesions through standard procedures. EndoRotor®, a non-thermal device specifically designed for endoscopic mucosal resection, has recently been assessed for its utility in removing colonic polyps, non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, and pancreatic necrosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the safety and efficacy of EndoRotor® in resecting scared or recurrence colonic polyps.

Methods: We conducted an exhaustive review of existing literature using databases such as Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until January 2023. Our aim was to find all studies that assessed the safety of non-thermal endoscopic resection devices in removing colonic polyps. The primary outcome we focused on was the rate of technical success. Secondary outcomes that we considered included the frequency of remaining lesions and instances of adverse events. To analyze these data, we used comprehensive meta-analysis software.

Results: Our analysis incorporated three studies comprising 54 patients who underwent resection of 60 lesions. The combined technical success rate was 93.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 77.7-98.6%, I2 = 25.5%). In patients who had another endoscopic examination, 20 were found to have a residual lesion. After the initial session, the combined rate of remaining lesions was 39.8% (95% CI: 15.3-70.8%, I2 = 74.5%). There were eight occurrences of intraoperative bleeding and four instances of bleeding post-procedure. The combined rate of intraoperative bleeding was 13.2% (95% CI: 6.7-24.3%, I2 = 0%), and post-procedure bleeding stood at 8.5% (95% CI: 3.4-19.8%, I2 = 0%). Only one major bleeding event was recorded, and no cases of perforation were reported.

Conclusion: Our research indicates that the EndoRotor® effectively removes scarred colonic polyps, though the rate of remaining lesions is significant, potentially necessitating several sessions for a thorough removal. There is a need for broader prospective studies, mainly randomized controlled trials, to further assess EndoRotor®'s efficiency and safety in eliminating colonic polyps.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

动力非热内镜结肠息肉切除装置的安全性和有效性:系统评价和荟萃分析。
背景:内镜下黏膜切除术是切除结肠息肉的常用方法。尽管如此,这些息肉在愈合的黏膜下基底复发可能会使通过标准程序提取残留病变变得复杂。EndoRotor®是一种专门为内镜黏膜切除术设计的非热设备,最近被评估其在去除结肠息肉、非发育异常巴雷特食管和胰腺坏死方面的效用。我们进行了一项系统综述和荟萃分析,以确定EndoRotor®切除惊恐或复发结肠息肉的安全性和有效性。方法:我们使用Medline、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane Library等数据库对现有文献进行了详尽的综述,直到2023年1月。我们的目的是寻找所有评估非热内镜切除装置在切除结肠息肉中的安全性的研究。我们关注的主要结果是技术成功率。我们考虑的次要结果包括残留病变的频率和不良事件的发生率。为了分析这些数据,我们使用了全面的荟萃分析软件。结果:我们的分析纳入了三项研究,包括54名患者,他们接受了60个病灶的切除。综合技术成功率为93.9%(95%置信区间(CI):77.7-98.6%,I2=25.5%)。在再次进行内镜检查的患者中,发现20例有残余病变。初次治疗后,残余病变的综合发生率为39.8%(95%CI:15.3-70.8%,I2=74.5%)。术中出血8例,术后出血4例。术中出血的综合发生率为13.2%(95%CI:6.7-24.3%,I2=0%),术后出血为8.5%(95%CI:3.4-19.8%,I2=0%)。只记录了一次大出血事件,没有穿孔病例报告。结论:我们的研究表明,EndoRotor®可以有效地去除结疤的结肠息肉,尽管残留病变的发生率很高,可能需要几次手术才能彻底去除。需要进行更广泛的前瞻性研究,主要是随机对照试验,以进一步评估EndoRotor®在消除结肠息肉方面的有效性和安全性。
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
Gastroenterology Research
Gastroenterology Research GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信