Long-Term Clinical Efficacy and Perioperative Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Early Gastric Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Abstract EN

Background.

To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for early gastric cancer (EGC).

Methods.

We searched the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to April 2017 and included studies that compared the outcomes of ESD with EMR for EGC.

These eligible studies that met the inclusion criteria were screened out and were assessed by two independent investigators.

Result.

In total, 18 retrospective cohort studies were eligible for analysis.

Our results indicated that ESD is more beneficial than EMR in increasing the complete resection rate and en bloc resection rate and decreasing the local recurrence rate.

However, ESD prolonged operative time and increased incidence of gastric perforation than EMR.

No differences were found in postoperative bleeding rate between the two approaches.

Conclusion.

Compared with EMR, ESD offers higher complete resection rate, higher en bloc resection rate, and lower local recurrence rate but has prolonged operative time and increased incidence of gastric perfusion.

There is no statistical difference in the rate of postoperative bleeding between the two groups.

However, the above conclusion needs further verification by well-designed, randomized trials with larger samples and long follow-up periods.