Clinical Endoscopy

Systematic Review and Meta-analysises

Transforming outcomes: the pivotal role of self-expanding metal stents in right- and left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions-bridge to surgery: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis: Sheza Malik, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Hajra Khan, Abul Hasan Shadali, Pradeep Yarra, Saurabh Chandan, Babu P. Mohan, Douglas G. Adler, Shivangi Kothari; Clin Endosc 2025;58(2):240-252. Published online February 3, 2025; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.120

Graphical Abstract Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are an alternative to emergency surgery (ES) for malignant colorectal obstruction. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes between SEMS as a bridge to surgery (BTS) and ES in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.
Methods
A comprehensive database search was conducted until October 2023 to compare outcomes between SEMS as a BTS and ES. A subgroup analysis of results by malignancy site was performed.
Results
We analyzed 57 studies, including 7,223 patients over a mean duration of 35.4 months. SEMS as a BTS showed clinical and technical success rates of 88.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.1%–90.1%; I2=68%) and 91.6% (95% CI, 89.7%–93.7%; I2=66%), respectively. SEMS as a BTS revealed reduced postoperative adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41–0.63; I2=70%; p<0.001) and 30-day mortality (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37–0.72; I2=10%; p<0.001) compared to ES. Subgroup analysis showed postoperative mortality of 5% and 1.5% for left- and right-sided malignancies, respectively. Adverse events were 15% and 33% for the right and left colon, respectively.
Conclusions
SEMS as a BTS demonstrated a higher success rate, fewer postoperative adverse events, and a reduced 30-day mortality rate than ES, supporting its use as the preferred initial intervention for right- and left-sided obstructions and indicating broader clinical adoption.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Successful Colonic Stenting Across the Ileocecal Valve With Severe Malignant Stenosis Using Ultra‐thin Scope and Single‐balloon Overtube
Takato Maeda, Norihiro Hanabata, Shohei Igarashi, Masayoshi Ko, Koji Shimaya, Hiroshi Numao, Masaki Munakata, Hirotake Sakuraba
DEN Open.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Nationwide Analysis of Right-Sided Colonic Stenting: Rarely Used but Reduces Stoma Creation Significantly
Khalid Ahmed, Ahmed Dirweesh, Zachary D. Leslie, Yasmin Ali, Nabeel Azeem, Eric Wise, Cyrus Jahansouz, Martin Freeman, Stuart K. Amateau
Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2026; 28(1): 250952. CrossRef
Minimally invasive, maximum impact: advances in the application of colonic stents
Filippos Koutroumpakis, Emmanuel Coronel
Current Opinion in Gastroenterology.2026; 42(1): 19. CrossRef
Embracing minimally invasive approaches to colorectal cancer resection
Nan Zun Teo, James Weiquan Li, James Chi Yung Ngu, Tiing Leong Ang
Singapore Medical Journal.2025; 66(Suppl 1): S38. CrossRef

4,209 View
192 Download
4 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Cold snare polypectomy versus cold endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: Vishali Moond, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Sheza Malik, Dushyant Singh Dahiya, Babu P. Mohan, Daryl Ramai, Michele McGinnis, Deepak Madhu, Mohammad Bilal, Aasma Shaukat, Saurabh Chandan; Clin Endosc 2024;57(6):747-758. Published online August 23, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.081

Graphical Abstract Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is routinely performed for small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm). However, challenges include insufficient resection depth and immediate bleeding, hindering precise pathological evaluation. We aimed to compare the outcomes of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with that of CSP for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm, using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods
Multiple databases were searched in December 2023 for RCTs reporting outcomes of CSP versus CEMR for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm in size. Our primary outcomes were rates of complete and en-bloc resections, while our secondary outcomes were total resection time (seconds) and adverse events, including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and perforation.
Results
The complete resection rates did not significantly differ (CSP, 91.8% vs. CEMR 94.6%), nor did the rates of en-bloc resection (CSP, 98.9% vs. CEMR, 98.3%) or incomplete resection (CSP, 6.7% vs. CEMR, 4.8%). Adverse event rates were similarly insignificant in variance. However, CEMR had a notably longer mean resection time (133.51 vs. 91.30 seconds).
Conclusions
Our meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that while both CSP and CEMR are equally safe and effective for resecting small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps, the latter is associated with a longer resection time.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Recent advancement in size measurement during endoscopy
Hye Kyung Jeon, Gwang Ha Kim
Clinical Endoscopy.2026; 59(1): 1. CrossRef
Does the size of the cold snare affect the outcome of cold snare polypectomy in the colon? A KASID prospective multicenter study
Seongwoo Choi, Jaeyoung Chun, Geunhyuk Choi, Yoojin Lee, Taegeun Gweon, Yunho Jung
Intestinal Research.2026; 24(1): 76. CrossRef
Iatrogenic colon perforation: endoscopic management or surgery
Seung Bum Lee
Clinical Endoscopy.2026; 59(1): 33. CrossRef

10,704 View
377 Download
4 Web of Science
3 Crossref

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search