Retrospective Comparison Between Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Large Colorectal Tumors

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions

“…The search retrieved 381 studies ( Figure 1) of which 11 studies [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 4678 patients: 1517 had an ESD (32.4%) and 3161 an EMR (67.6%) ( Table 1). Five are full-text articles and six are abstracts to congresses.…”

“…All were retrospective observational cohort studies, in one case with patient sequential inclusion. Indications for EMR and ESD were lesions !20 mm in all but three studies 13,15,21 in which ESD was indicated for non-granular laterally spreading tumors (LST-NG) !20 mm and granular laterally spreading tumors (LST-G) !30 mm or !40 mm. Only three of the full-text articles and none of the abstracts gave a clear definition of ''complete resection.''…”

“…Since the year 2000, 11 studies 12–22 have been published comparing EMR and ESD for the treatment of colorectal resection, although six are in abstract form only. Nevertheless, statistical analysis showed an acceptable level of evidence, as confirmed by risk of bias analysis and heterogeneity test.…”

“…sessile lesions >20 mm, according to the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines. 23 Since the year 2000, 11 studies [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] have been published comparing EMR and ESD for the treatment of colorectal resection, although six are in abstract form only. Nevertheless, statistical analysis showed an acceptable level of evidence, as confirmed by risk of bias analysis and heterogeneity test.…”