Efficacy and Safety of Four Different Endoscopic Treatments for Early Esophageal Cancer: a Network Meta-analysis
Wenyu Hu,Jia Yu,Nan Yao,Xiaotong Li,Yixue Yang,Ling Wang,Mengzi Sun,Yinpei Guo,Han Wang,Shoumeng Yan,Bo Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-022-05276-2
2022-02-23
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
Abstract:Purpose Cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRC), ligation-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRL), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and multiband mucosectomy (MBM) are used for treating early esophageal cancer patients. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of four different endoscopic treatments. Methods Electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to include relevant studies published from database inception until February 15, 2021. There were no date or language restrictions. Data related to study such as characteristics, methods, outcomes, and risks of bias were extracted by two reviewers. Results A total of 11 articles with 1880 patients were included. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that ESD was a better choice considering the efficacy of en bloc resection rate (surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) = ESD: 99.5%, EMRC: 26.5%, MBM: 24.1%) and local recurrence rate (SUCRA = EMRC: 95.6%, MBM: 42.9%, ESD: 11.6%). MBM had a lower rate of side effects compared to the other treatments: perforation rate (SUCRA = ESD: 100%, EMRC: 48.1%, MBM: 1.9%), stricture rate (SUCRA = ESD: 99.8%, MBM: 40.8%, EMRC: 9.4%), and bleeding rate (SUCRA = EMRC: 69.4%, ESD: 62.2%, EMRL: 61.6%, MBM: 6.8%). MBM also had the shortest operation time and smallest diameter of the specimens. Conclusion The MBM endoscopic treatment was recommended for early esophageal cancer patients, but considering the increase in lesion size, ESD would be better.
gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery