PLoS ONE (Jan 2024)

Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

  • Xue Wang,
  • Yue Wang,
  • Xueyan Cao,
  • Chunmei Zhang,
  • Lin Miao

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299931
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 3
p. e0299931

Abstract

Read online

Background and aimUnderwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been an emerging substitute for conventional EMR (CEMR). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficiency and safety of the two techniques for removing ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were searched up to February 2023 to identify eligible studies that compared the outcomes of UEMR and CEMR. This meta-analysis was conducted on the en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, complete resection rate, procedure time, adverse events rate and recurrence rate.ResultsNine studies involving 1,727 colorectal polyps were included: 881 were removed by UEMR, and 846 were removed by CEMR. UEMR was associated with a significant increase in en bloc resection rate [Odds ratio(OR) 1.69, 95% confidence interval(CI) 1.36-2.10, pConclusionUEMR can be a safe and efficient substitute for CEMR in removing ≥10 mm sessile or flat colorectal polyps. More studies verifying the advantages of UEMR over CEMR are needed to promote its application.