Prevention of esophageal stricture after endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_OLIVEIRA_Prevention_of_esophageal_stricture_after_endoscopic_submucosal_dissection_2016.PDF (2.25 MB)
Citações na Scopus
37
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SPRINGER
Autores
BERNARDO, W. M.
Citação
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, v.30, n.7, p.2779-2791, 2016
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of extensive superficial cancers of the esophagus may progress with high rates of postoperative stenosis, resulting in significantly decreased quality of life. Several therapies are performed to prevent this, but have not yet been compared in a systematic review. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis were performed using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, LILACS, Scopus, and CINAHL databases. Clinical trials and observational studies were searched from March 2014 to February 2015. Search terms included: endoscopy, ESD, esophageal stenosis, and esophageal stricture. Three retrospective and four prospective (three randomized) cohort studies were selected and involved 249 patients with superficial esophageal neoplasia who underwent ESD, at least two-thirds of the circumference. We grouped trials comparing different techniques to prevent esophagus stenosis post-ESD. We conducted different meta-analyses on randomized clinical trials (RCT), non-RCT, and global analysis. In RCT (three studies, n = 85), the preventive therapy decreased the risk of stenosis (risk difference = -0.36, 95 % CI -0.55 to -0.18, P = 0.0001). Two studies (one randomized and one non-randomized, n = 55) showed that preventative therapy lowered the average number of endoscopy dilatations (mean difference = -8.57, 95 % CI -13.88 to -3.25, P < 0.002). There were no significant differences in the three RCT studies (n = 85) in complication rates between patients with preventative therapy and those without (risk difference = 0.02, 95 % CI -0.09 to 0.14, P = 0.68). The use of preventive therapy after extensive ESD of the esophagus reduces the risk of stenosis and the number of endoscopic dilatations for resolution of stenosis without increasing the number of complications.
Palavras-chave
Endoscopy submucosal dissection, ESD, Esophageal stenosis, Esophageal stricture, Meta-analysis, Systematic review
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/16201
Referências
  1. Axon A, 2005, ENDOSCOPY, V37, P570, DOI 10.1055/s-2005-861352
  2. Chennat J, 2009, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V104, P2684, DOI 10.1038/ajg.2009.465
  3. Devesa SS, 1998, CANCER, V83, P2049, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19981115)83:10<2049::AID-CNCR1>3.3.CO;2-U
  4. Guo HM, 2014, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V20, P5540, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v20.i18.5540
  5. Hanaoka N, 2012, ENDOSCOPY, V44, P1007, DOI 10.1055/s-0032-1310107
  6. Hashimoto S, 2011, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V74, P1389, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.07.070
  7. Herszenyi L, 2010, EUR REV MED PHARMACO, V14, P249
  8. Higgins JPT, 2003, BRIT MED J, V327, P557, DOI 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  9. Isomoto H, 2011, BMC GASTROENTEROL, V11, DOI 10.1186/1471-230X-11-46
  10. Katada C, 2003, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V57, P165, DOI 10.1067/mge.2003.73
  11. Kochhar R, 2002, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V56, P829, DOI 10.1067/mge.2002.129871
  12. Kuwano H, 2007, ESOPHAGUS, V5, P61
  13. Miyashita M, 1997, AM J SURG, V174, P442, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9610(97)00116-5
  14. Mizuta H, 2009, DIS ESOPHAGUS, V22, P626, DOI 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2009.00954.x
  15. Mori H, 2013, J GASTROEN HEPATOL, V28, P999, DOI 10.1111/jgh.12154
  16. Neuhaus H, 2009, DIGEST ENDOSC, V21, pS4, DOI 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2009.00864.x
  17. Ohki T, 2012, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V143, P582, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.04.050
  18. Ono S, 2009, ENDOSCOPY, V41, P661, DOI 10.1055/s-0029-1214867
  19. Ono S, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V70, P860, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2009.04.044
  20. Participants in the Paris Workshop, 2003, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V58, pS3
  21. Repici A, 2010, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V71, P715, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2009.11.020
  22. [Anonymous], 2014, REVMAN COMP PROGR VE
  23. Sato H, 2013, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V78, P250, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2013.01.008
  24. Shamseer L, 2015, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V349, DOI 10.1136/bmj.g7647
  25. Shimizu Y, 2013, DIGEST ENDOSC, V25, P13, DOI 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2012.01408.x
  26. Takahashi H, 2015, BMC GASTROENTEROL, V15, DOI 10.1186/s12876-014-0226-6
  27. Toyanaga T, 2013, SURG ENDOSC, V27, P1000
  28. Uno K, 2012, J CLIN GASTROENTEROL, V46, pE76, DOI 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31824fff76
  29. van Vilsteren FGI, 2011, GUT, V60, P765, DOI 10.1136/gut.2010.229310
  30. Wang CX, 2013, EXP THER MED, V5, P292, DOI 10.3892/etm.2012.753
  31. Wen J, 2014, DIGEST DIS SCI, V59, P658, DOI 10.1007/s10620-013-2958-5
  32. Wen J, 2014, DIGEST DIS SCI, V59, P2607, DOI 10.1007/s10620-014-3332-y
  33. Werner S, 2003, PHYSIOL REV, V83, P835, DOI 10.1152/physrev.00031.2002
  34. Yamaguchi N, 2011, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V73, P1115, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.02.005

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MGT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/InCor
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/35
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03