息肉切除术
医学
镊子
随机对照试验
荟萃分析
置信区间
相对风险
粘膜切除术
科克伦图书馆
外科
普通外科
结肠镜检查
内科学
结直肠癌
内窥镜检查
癌症
作者
Mohamed Abuelazm,Ahmed K. Awad,Islam Mohamed,Abdelrahman Mahmoud,Hosam Shaikhkhalil,Nour Shaheen,Omar Ahmed Abdelwahab,Ahmed M. Afifi,Basel Abdelazeem,Mohamed Othman
标识
DOI:10.1080/03007995.2023.2262374
摘要
In the management of small and diminutive polyps, cold polypectomy is favored over electrocautery polypectomy. However, the optimal cold polypectomy technique is still controversial. Hence, this review aims to investigate the most effective cold technique for small and diminutive colorectal polyps.We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through 10 February 2023. R software, (R version 4.2.0) and meta-insight software were used to pool dichotomous outcomes using risk ratio (RR) presented with the corresponding confidence interval (CI). Our protocol was prospectively published in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022345619.Nineteen RCTs with 3649 patients and 4800 polyps were included in our analysis. Cold techniques (cold forceps polypectomy (CFP), jumbo forceps polypectomy (JFP), dedicated cold snare polypectomy (D-CSP), conventional cold snare polypectomy (C-CSP), underwater cold snare polypectomy (U-CSP), and cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) were included in our comparative analysis. CFP was less effective in achieving complete histological resection than C-CSP (RR: 1.10 with 95% CI [1.03-1.18]), CS-EMR (RR: 1.12 with 95% CI [1.02-1.23]), D-CSP (RR: 1.17 with 95% CI [1.04-1.32]), and U-CSP (RR: 1.21 with 95% CI [1.07-1.38]). However, the rest of the comparisons showed no difference.CFP is the least effective method for small and diminutive polyps' removal, and any snare polypectomy technique will achieve better results, warranting more large-scale RCTs to investigate the most effective snare polypectomy technique.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI