KSGE
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
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
- Received May 10, 2024 Accepted July 10, 2024 Published online February 3, 2025
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.120 [Epub ahead of print]
-
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.
- 443 View
- 69 Download
- 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
PDFSupplementary MaterialPubReaderePub
- 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.
- 3,468 View
- 304 Download
First
Prev
