Original articleClinical endoscopyEfficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection

BackgroundEMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used frequently to remove colon neoplasms. However, the predominance of these procedures has not yet been thoroughly explored.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and adverse events related to EMR with those related to ESD for colon neoplasms.DesignA meta-analysis of 8 studies published between 2005 and 2013.SettingMulticenter review.PatientsPatients from 8 studies yielding 2299 lesions.InterventionsEMR or ESD.Main Outcome MeasurementsEn bloc resection, curative resection, recurrence, and adverse events.ResultsThe pooled odds ratios (OR) (OR [95% confidence interval]) for the tumor size, length of the procedure, en bloc resection, curative resection, recurrence, additional surgery, delayed bleeding, and perforation by ESD versus EMR were 7.38 (6.42-8.34), 58.07 (36.27-79.88), 6.84 (3.30-14.18), 4.26 (3.77-6.57), 0.08 (0.04-0.17), 2.16 (1.16-4.03), 0.85 (0.45-1.60), and 4.96 (2.79-8.85), respectively.LimitationsThis analysis included only nonrandomized studies.ConclusionThe size of the tumor and rate of en bloc resection and curative resection were higher, and the rate of recurrence was lower in the ESD group versus the EMR group. However, in the ESD group, the procedure was longer, and the rate of additional surgery and perforation was higher, suggesting that the indications for ESD should therefore be rigorously determined in order to avoid such problems.