RESUMEN
Background: Successful Crohn's disease (CD) therapy relies on timely and precise management strategies. Endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) has been applied as a first-line treatment for symptomatic CD-associated strictures due to its minimally invasive nature and the possibility of preserving intestinal length. Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine patient-related predictive factors associated with the need for surgery for CD-associated ileocolic strictures after technically successful EBD. Methods: All original studies published before December 2023 that reported the outcomes of patients treated with EBD for ileocolic strictures secondary to CD and described follow-up for at least 1 year were included. The difference in risk of needing surgery was calculated for 8 different patient characteristics (Sex, smoking habit, previous surgery, biologic therapy, steroids, immunosuppressors, nature of the stricture, and endoscopic disease activity). Results: There were significant differences in the risk of needing surgery after EBD among patients who underwent surgery and patients without a history of surgery (RD: -0.20 [-0.31, -0.08]), patients with endoscopic mucosal activity and patients in remission at the time of EBD (RD: 0.19 [0.04, 0.34]), patients using biologics at the time of EBD and patients not using biologics (RD: -0.09 [-0.16, -0.03]), and patients using steroids and those not using steroids at the time of EBD (RD: 0.16 [0.07, 0.26]). Conclusions: The use of biologics and endoscopic disease remission at the time of EBD were protective factors against the need for surgery. No previous surgery or use of steroids at the time of EBD was associated with the need for surgery during follow-up.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technically complex procedure. The scissor knife mechanism may potentially provide easier and safer colorectal ESD. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of scissor-assisted vs. conventional ESD for colorectal lesions. METHODS: A search strategy was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Lilacs databases from January 1990 to November 2023 according to PRISMA guidelines. Fixed and random-effects models were used for statistical analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 test. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I and RoB-2 tools. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. RESULTS: A total of five studies (three retrospective and two randomized controlled trials, including a total of 1575 colorectal ESD) were selected. The intraoperative perforation rate was statistically lower (risk difference [RD] -0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.04 to -0.01; P = 0.001; I2 = 0%) and the self-completion rate was statistically higher (RD 0.14; 95% CI 0.06, 0.23; P = 0.0006; I2 = 0%) in the scissor-assisted group compared with the conventional ESD group. There was no statistical difference in R0 resection rate, en bloc resection rate, mean procedure time, or delayed bleeding rate between the groups. CONCLUSION: Scissor knife-assisted ESD is as effective as conventional knife-assisted ESD for colorectal lesions with lower intraoperative perforation rate and a higher self-completion rate.