Effect of prophylactic closure on adverse events after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: A meta-analysis

Abstract

Background and aim: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has a high en bloc resection rate and is widely performed for large colorectal lesions. However, colorectal ESD is associated with a high frequency of adverse events (AEs), and the efficacy of prophylactic endoscopic closure after ESD for preventing AEs is still controversial. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of closure on AEs following colorectal ESD.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible studies. The chi-square-based Q statistics and the I² test were used to test for heterogeneity. Pooling was conducted using a fixed or random effects model.

Results: We identified eight eligible studies that compared the effects of closure vs non-closure with respect to delayed bleeding, delayed perforation, and post-ESD coagulation syndrome. Compared with non-closure (5.2%), closure was associated with a lower incidence (0.9%) of delayed bleeding (pooled odd ratios [ORs]:0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.49) following ESD. The pooled ORs showed no significant differences in incidence of delayed perforation (pooled OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.05-1.03) or post-ESD coagulation syndrome (pooled OR:0.75; 95% CI: 0.26-2.18) between the closure and non-closure groups.

Conclusion: Prophylactic endoscopic closure may reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding following ESD of colorectal lesions. Future studies are needed to further illuminate risk factors and stratify high risk subjects for a cost-effective preventive strategy.

Keywords: bleeding; endoscopic submucosal dissection; meta-analysis; prophylactic endoscopic closure.