Systematic Evaluation Of The Efficacy And Safety Of Different Endoscopic Techniques For Small Rectal Carcinoid

Objective through the Meta analysis,system evaluation the efficacy and safety of different endoscopic techniques treat small rectal neuroendocrine tumors(< 2 cm in diameter).Method retrieve the study of the efficacy and safety about different endoscopic treat small rectal carcinoid(diameter < 2 cm).By computer retrieval Pub Med Cochrane ?Embase? CNKI ?Wan Fang?VIP database,etc,and further to research into the references of included studies?According to the inclusion criteria,the studies met the inclusion criteria according to the Cochrane system evaluation method,after Independent data extraction?quality evaluation and cross check,Meta analysis was performed using Stata12.0 software.Results A total of 31 studies were included,There were 2,425 patients.In terms of complete resection rate of carcinoid tissue,ESD and m-EMR are significantly superior to traditional EMR,the difference was statistically significant(P=0.00,P=0.00),the complete resection rate of carcinoid tissue of m-EMR is similar to ESD,there was no significant difference between the two groups(P=0.43).Different m-EMR and ESD subgroups analysis showed that different m-EMR and ESD had similar complete resection rates of carcinoid tissues.In terms of treatment time,EMR treatment time was the shortest,the following are m-EMR,ESD is the most time-consuming.Different m-EMR and ESD subgroups analysis showed that compared with ESD,different m-EMR can save more time than ESD.In terms of complications,m-EMR is relatively safe with fewer complications.Different m-EMR and ESD subgroups analysis showed that compared with ESD,EMR-C is relatively safe with lower complications,treatment-related complications of EMR-CI?EMR-L?EMR-D were similar to ESD.In terms of recurrence rates,there was no significant difference in postoperative recurrence rate among the three groups.Different m-EMR and ESD subgroups analysis showed that different m-EMR and ESD have similar recurrence rate?Conclusion Meta analysis results showed that m-EMR and ESD have similar complete resection rate and recurrence rate,the complete resection rate of carcinoid tissues in both groups was significantly higher than that of conventional EMR,but the m-EMR treatment time was shorter and complications are relatively few,therefore,in the clinical treatment of small rectal carcinoid with diameter < 2 cm and no invasion of muscularis propria and lymphatic vessels,m-EMR should be priority given.Different m-EMR and ESD subgroups analysis showed that the complete resection rate and recurrence rate of carcinoid tissues of different m-EMR and ESD were similar,different m-EMR can save more time than ESD.Compared with ESD,EMR-C is relatively safe with fewer complications and seems to be the better choice,however,more clinical studies with large sample size and clinical data comparing different m-EMR are needed for further evaluation?...