Efficacy of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

backgroundTo evaluate the effectiveness of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions (SENL).

methodsA comprehensive search for studies investigating the efficacy of ESTD and ESD for SENL was conducted to search for relevant studies through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Weighted pooled rates were calculated for en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, operation time, dissection area, dissection speed, and adverse events. The 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for effect size were used to calculate the pooled value using the fixed- or random-effects model.

resultsA total of seventeen studies with 1161 patients were identified and included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that ESTD had significantly higher en bloc resection (OR 3.98; 95% CI 1.74 to 9.12; p = 0.001) and R0 resection rates (OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.54 to 3.46; p < 0.001) than ESD. The operation time in the ESTD group was shorter than that in the ESD group (SMD = - 0.57; 95% CI - 0.95 to - 0.19; p = 0.003). The dissection area of the ESTD group was larger than that in the ESD group (SMD = 0.49; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.83; p = 0.004), and the dissection speed is faster than that in the ESD group (SMD = 1.52; 95%CI 1.09 to 0.83; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in esophageal stenosis (p = 0.94) between the two techniques. However, ESTD was superior to ESD in other adverse events (p < 0.05).

conclusionESTD has a significant advantage over ESD in the treatment of SENL. ESTD has significantly higher en bloc and R0 resection rates and reduced adverse events.