Ni DQ, Lu YP, Liu XQ, Gao LY, Huang X. Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection in treatment of colorectal polyps: A meta-analysis. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(20): 4826-4837 [PMID: 33195650 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i20.4826]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Xuan Huang, PhD, Doctor, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, No. 54 Youdian Road, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China. huangxuan1976@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Medicine, Research & Experimental
Article-Type of This Article
Meta-Analysis
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. Oct 26, 2020; 8(20): 4826-4837 Published online Oct 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i20.4826
Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection in treatment of colorectal polyps: A meta-analysis
Dong-Qiong Ni, Yu-Ping Lu, Xi-Qiao Liu, Li-Ying Gao, Xuan Huang
Dong-Qiong Ni, Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Hospital of Shaoxing University, Shaoxing 312000, Zhejiang Province, China
Yu-Ping Lu, Xi-Qiao Liu, Li-Ying Gao, Xuan Huang, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China
Author contributions: Ni DQ proposed the research concept, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript; Lu YP, Liu XQ, and Gao LY collected the data and assessed the quality score; Huang X critically revised the manuscript; all authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Supported byTraditional Chinese Medicine Science and Technology Program of Zhejiang Province of China, No. 2016ZA089; and Zhejiang Medical and Health Science and Technology Project, No. 2020RC025.
Conflict-of-interest statement: Xuan Huang has received research funding from Traditional Chinese Medicine Science and Technology Program of Zhejiang Province of China (2016ZA089) and Zhejiang Medical and Health Science and Technology Project (2020RC025).
PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Xuan Huang, PhD, Doctor, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, No. 54 Youdian Road, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China. huangxuan1976@163.com
Received: May 16, 2020 Peer-review started: May 16, 2020 First decision: July 29, 2020 Revised: August 9, 2020 Accepted: September 3, 2020 Article in press: September 3, 2020 Published online: October 26, 2020 Processing time: 162 Days and 20.3 Hours
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS
Research background
It remains a matter of debate whether there is a difference in the effectiveness and safety between underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).
Research motivation
By comparing the effectiveness and safety between UEMR and EMR, we wanted to search a more effective treatment for colorectal polys.
Research objectives
Through this meta-analysis, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of UEMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps.
Research methods
The clinical studies that compared the effectiveness or safety of UMER in the treatment of colorectal polyps were searched in databases.
Research results
Compared with the EMR group, the en bloc resection rate was improved and the procedure time was shortened in the UEMR group, while the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different. What's more, for polyps with a diameter equal to or greater than 20 mm, the en bloc resection rate of UEMR was higher than that of EMR.
Research conclusions
UEMR is an effective technique for colorectal polyps and appears to have some advantages over EMR, particularly with regard to some treatment outcomes.
Research perspectives
We will carry out more studies on the safety and efficacy of UEMR in treatment of colorectal polys to confirm the findings of the present study. And through these studies, we hope that the technique of UMER could be widely used in clinical practice.