Top

Published in:

01-02-2014 | Review

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large noninvasive rectal lesions

Authors: Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Passera, Yutaka Saito, Taku Sakamoto, Nozomu Kobayashi, Naoto Sakamoto, Naohisa Yoshida, Yuji Naito, Mitsuhiro Fujishiro, Keiko Niimi, Tomohiko Ohya, Ken Ohata, Shinichi Okamura, Shinei Iizuka, Yoji Takeuchi, Noriya Uedo, Pietro Fusaroli, Marco Augusto Bonino, Mauro Verra, Mario Morino

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2014

Abstract

Background

For almost 30 years, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) has been the mainstay treatment for large rectal lesions. With the advent of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), flexible endoscopy has aimed at en bloc R0 resection of superficial lesions of the digestive tract. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the safety and effectiveness of ESD and full-thickness rectal wall excision by TEM in the treatment of large nonpedunculated rectal lesions preoperatively assessed as noninvasive.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature published between 1984 and 2010 was conducted (Registration no. CRD42012001882). Data were integrated with those from the original databases requested from the study authors when needed. Pooled estimates of the proportions of patients with en bloc R0 resection, complications, recurrence, and need for further treatment in the ESD and TEM series were compared using random-effects single-arm meta-analysis.

Results

This review included 11 ESD and 10 TEM series (2,077 patients). The en bloc resection rate was 87.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 84.3–90.6) for the ESD patients versus 98.7 % (95 % CI 97.4–99.3 %) for the TEM patients (P < 0.001). The R0 resection rate was 74.6 % (95 % CI 70.4–78.4 %) for the ESD patients versus 88.5 % (95 % CI 85.9–90.6 %) for the TEM patients (P < 0.001). The postoperative complications rate was 8.0 % (95 %, CI 5.4–11.8 %) for the ESD patients versus 8.4 % (95 % CI 5.2–13.4 %) for the TEM patients (P = 0.874). The recurrence rate was 2.6 % (95 % CI 1.3–5.2 %) for the ESD patients versus 5.2 % (95 % CI 4.0–6.9 %) for the TEM patients (P < 0.001). Nevertheless, the rate for the overall need of further abdominal treatment, defined as any type of surgery performed through an abdominal access, including both complications and pathology indications, was 8.4 % (95 % CI 4.9–13.9 %) for the ESD patients versus 1.8 % (95 % CI 0.8–3.7 %) for the TEM patients (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The ESD procedure appears to be a safe technique, but TEM achieves a higher R0 resection rate when performed in full-thickness fashion, significantly reducing the need for further abdominal treatment.

Hermanek P, Gall FP (1986) Early (microinvasive) colorectal carcinoma: pathology, diagnosis, surgical treatment. Int J Colorectal Dis 1:79–84PubMedCrossRef

Allaix ME, Arezzo A, Cassoni P et al (2012) Recurrence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large rectal adenomas. Surg Endosc 26:2594–2600PubMedCrossRef

Ohkuwa M, Hosokawa K, Boku N et al (2001) New endoscopic treatment for intramucosal gastric tumors using an insulated-tip diathermic knife. Endoscopy 33:221–226PubMedCrossRef

Tamegai Y, Saito Y, Masaki N et al (2007) Endoscopic submucosal dissection: a safe technique for colorectal tumors. Endoscopy 39:418–422PubMedCrossRef

Higgins JPT, Green S (2010) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. The cochrane collaboration 2009. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 62:1006–1012PubMedCrossRef

Buess G, Kipfmüller K, Hack D et al (1988) Technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Surg Endosc 2:71–75PubMedCrossRef

Kudo S, Rubio CA, Teixeira CR et al (2001) Pit pattern in colorectal neoplasia: endoscopic magnifying view. Endoscopy 33:367–373PubMedCrossRef

Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13–22PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

10.

http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 1 Nov 2012

11.

Fujishiro M, Yahagi N, Nakamura M et al (2006) Endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal epithelial neoplasia. Endoscopy 38:493–497PubMedCrossRef

12.

Onozato Y, Kakizaki S, Ishihara H et al (2007) Endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal tumors. Endoscopy 39:423–427PubMedCrossRef

13.

Ohya T, Ohata K, Sumiyama K et al (2009) Balloon overtube-guided colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Gastroenterol 15:6086–6090PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

14.

Iizuka H, Okamura S, Onozato Y et al (2009) Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal tumors. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 33:1004–1011PubMedCrossRef

15.

Uraoka T, Ishikawa S, Kato J et al (2010) Advantages of using thin endoscope-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection technique for large colorectal tumors. Dig Endosc 22:186–191PubMedCrossRef

16.

Ishii N, Itoh T, Horiki N et al (2010) Endoscopic submucosal dissection with a combination of small-caliber-tip transparent hood and flex knife for large superficial colorectal neoplasias including ileocecal lesions. Surg Endosc 24:1941–1947PubMedCrossRef

17.

Takeuchi Y, Uedo N, Ishihara R et al (2010) Efficacy of an endo-knife with a water-jet function (Flushknife) for endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial colorectal neoplasms. Am J Gastroenterol 105:314–322PubMedCrossRef

18.

Yoshida N, Naito Y, Kugai M et al (2010) Efficient hemostatic method for endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal tumors. World J Gastroenterol 16:4180–4186PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

19.

Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y et al (2010) A prospective, multicenter study of 1,111 colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissections (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 72:1217–1225PubMedCrossRef

20.

Fusaroli P, Grillo A, Zanarini S et al (2009) Usefulness of a second endoscopic arm to improve therapeutic endoscopy in the lower gastrointestinal tract: preliminary experience: a case series. Endoscopy 41:997–1000PubMedCrossRef

21.

Niimi K, Fujishiro M, Kodashima S et al (2010) Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms. Endoscopy 42:723–729PubMedCrossRef

22.

Said S, Stippel D (1996) 10 years experiences with transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Histopathologic and clinical analysis. Chirurg 67:139–144PubMed

23.

Cocilovo C, Smith LE, Stahl T et al (2003) Transanal endoscopic excision of rectal adenomas. Surg Endosc 17:1461–1463PubMedCrossRef

24.

Langer C, Liersch T, Suss M et al (2003) Surgical cure for early rectal carcinoma and large adenoma: transanal endoscopic microsurgery (using ultrasound or electrosurgery) compared to conventional local and radical resection. Int J Colorectal Dis 18:222–229PubMed

25.

Neary P, Makin GB, White TJ et al (2003) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: a viable operative alternative in selected patients with rectal lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 10:1106–1111PubMedCrossRef

26.

Schafer H, Baldus SE, Holscher AH (2006) Giant adenomas of the rectum: complete resection by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Int J Colorectal Dis 21:533–537PubMedCrossRef

27.

Ganai S, Kanumuri P, Rao RS et al (2006) Local recurrence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal polyps and early cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 13:547–556PubMedCrossRef

28.

Doornebosch PG, Gosselink MP, Neijenhuis PA et al (2008) Impact of transanal endoscopic microsurgery on functional outcome and quality of life. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:709–713PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

29.

Guerrieri M, Baldarelli M, de Sanctis A et al (2010) Treatment of rectal adenomas by transanal endoscopic microsurgery: 15 years’ experience. Surg Endosc 24:445–449PubMedCrossRef

30.

de Graaf EJ, Burger JW, van Ijsseldijk AL et al (2011) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery is superior to transanal excision of rectal adenomas. Colorectal Dis 13:762–767PubMedCrossRef

31.

Morino M, Allaix ME, Caldart M et al (2011) Risk factors for recurrence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal malignant neoplasm. Surg Endosc 25:3683–3690PubMedCrossRef

32.

Allaix ME, Arezzo A, Caldart M et al (2009) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms: experience of 300 consecutive cases. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1831–1836PubMedCrossRef

33.

Barendse RM, van den Broek FJ, Dekker E et al (2011) Systematic review of endoscopic mucosal resection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large rectal adenomas. Endoscopy 43:941–949PubMedCrossRef

34.

Watanabe T, Itabashi M, Shimada Y et al (2012) Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2010 for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 17:1–29PubMedCrossRef

35.

Kiriyama S, Saito Y, Matsuda T et al (2011) Comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection with transanal resection for noninvasive rectal tumor: a retrospective study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 26:1028–1033PubMedCrossRef

36.

Moore JS, Cataldo PA, Osler T, Hyman NH (2008) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery is more effective than traditional transanal excision for resection of rectal masses. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1026–1030PubMedCrossRef

37.

Schlemper RJ, Itabashi M, Kato Y et al (1998) Differences in the diagnostic criteria used by Japanese and Western pathologists to diagnose colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 82:60–69PubMedCrossRef

Title: Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large noninvasive rectal lesions
Authors: Alberto Arezzo
Roberto Passera
Yutaka Saito
Taku Sakamoto
Nozomu Kobayashi
Naoto Sakamoto
Naohisa Yoshida
Yuji Naito
Mitsuhiro Fujishiro
Keiko Niimi
Tomohiko Ohya
Ken Ohata
Shinichi Okamura
Shinei Iizuka
Yoji Takeuchi
Noriya Uedo
Pietro Fusaroli
Marco Augusto Bonino
Mauro Verra
Mario Morino
Publication date: 01-02-2014
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3238-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large noninvasive rectal lesions

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Preoperative opioid use and the outcome of thoracoscopic splanchnicectomy in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review

Effects of sleeve gastrectomy in high fat diet-induced obese mice: respective role of reduced caloric intake, white adipose tissue inflammation and changes in adipose tissue and ectopic fat depots

Feasibility of the trans-umbilical route compared with the trans-oral route in gastric upper body endoscopic submucosal dissection: a porcine model

A modified laparoscopic hernioplasty (TAPP) is the standard procedure for inguinal and femoral hernias: a retrospective 17-year analysis with 1,123 hernia repairs

Comparative assessment of physical and cognitive ergonomics associated with robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgeries

Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for small upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer