Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background and Aims: Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy in order to resect upper gastrointestinal lesions. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LECS in patients with EGJ (esophagogastric junction), gastric and duodenal lesions, as well as to compare LECS with pure endoscopic and pure laparoscopic procedures. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched. Efficacy (R0, recurrence) and safety (conversion rate, procedure and hospitalization time, adverse events, mortality) outcomes were extracted and pooled (odds ratio or mean difference) using a random-effects model. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and heterogeneity by Cochran’s Q test and I2 . Subgroup analysis according to location was performed. Results: This meta-analysis included 24 studies/1,336 patients (all retrospective cohorts). No significant differences were found between LECS and preexisting techniques (endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/laparoscopy) regarding any outcomes. However, there was a trend to shorter hospitalization time, longer procedure duration, and fewer adverse events in LECS versus Laparoscopy and ESD. R0 tended to be higher in the LECS group. Hospitalization time was significantly shorter in gastric versus EGJ lesions (mean 7.3 vs. 13.7 days, 95% CI: 6.6-7.9 vs. 8.9-19.3). There were no significant differences in conversion rate, adverse events, or mean procedural time according to location. There was a trend to higher conversion rate and longer procedure durations in EGJ and higher rate of adverse events in duodenal lesions. Conclusion: LECS is a valid, safe, and effective treatment option in patients with EGJ, gastric, and duo-denal lesions, although existing studies are retrospective and prone to selection bias. Prospective studies are needed to assess if LECS is superior to established techniques. Key Messages: LECS is safe and effective in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal lesions, but there is no evidence of superiority over established techniques.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Brito,Sara Oliveira de, Libânio,Diogo, Pinto,Cláudia Martins Marques, Teixeira,João Pedro Pinho Osório de Araújo, Teixeira,João Paulo Meireles de Araújo
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia 2023
Online Access:http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100004
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S2341-45452023000100004
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S2341-454520230001000042023-07-24Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisBrito,Sara Oliveira deLibânio,DiogoPinto,Cláudia Martins MarquesTeixeira,João Pedro Pinho Osório de AraújoTeixeira,João Paulo Meireles de Araújo Laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery Endoscopic submucosal dissection Laparoscopic resection Subepithelial lesions Meta-analysis Abstract Background and Aims: Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy in order to resect upper gastrointestinal lesions. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LECS in patients with EGJ (esophagogastric junction), gastric and duodenal lesions, as well as to compare LECS with pure endoscopic and pure laparoscopic procedures. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched. Efficacy (R0, recurrence) and safety (conversion rate, procedure and hospitalization time, adverse events, mortality) outcomes were extracted and pooled (odds ratio or mean difference) using a random-effects model. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and heterogeneity by Cochran’s Q test and I2 . Subgroup analysis according to location was performed. Results: This meta-analysis included 24 studies/1,336 patients (all retrospective cohorts). No significant differences were found between LECS and preexisting techniques (endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/laparoscopy) regarding any outcomes. However, there was a trend to shorter hospitalization time, longer procedure duration, and fewer adverse events in LECS versus Laparoscopy and ESD. R0 tended to be higher in the LECS group. Hospitalization time was significantly shorter in gastric versus EGJ lesions (mean 7.3 vs. 13.7 days, 95% CI: 6.6-7.9 vs. 8.9-19.3). There were no significant differences in conversion rate, adverse events, or mean procedural time according to location. There was a trend to higher conversion rate and longer procedure durations in EGJ and higher rate of adverse events in duodenal lesions. Conclusion: LECS is a valid, safe, and effective treatment option in patients with EGJ, gastric, and duo-denal lesions, although existing studies are retrospective and prone to selection bias. Prospective studies are needed to assess if LECS is superior to established techniques. Key Messages: LECS is safe and effective in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal lesions, but there is no evidence of superiority over established techniques.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSociedade Portuguesa de GastrenterologiaGE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.30 n.1 20232023-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100004en10.1159/000526644
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Portugal
countrycode PT
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-pt
tag revista
region Europa del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Brito,Sara Oliveira de
Libânio,Diogo
Pinto,Cláudia Martins Marques
Teixeira,João Pedro Pinho Osório de Araújo
Teixeira,João Paulo Meireles de Araújo
spellingShingle Brito,Sara Oliveira de
Libânio,Diogo
Pinto,Cláudia Martins Marques
Teixeira,João Pedro Pinho Osório de Araújo
Teixeira,João Paulo Meireles de Araújo
Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
author_facet Brito,Sara Oliveira de
Libânio,Diogo
Pinto,Cláudia Martins Marques
Teixeira,João Pedro Pinho Osório de Araújo
Teixeira,João Paulo Meireles de Araújo
author_sort Brito,Sara Oliveira de
title Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort efficacy and safety of laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery in upper gastrointestinal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
description Abstract Background and Aims: Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy in order to resect upper gastrointestinal lesions. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LECS in patients with EGJ (esophagogastric junction), gastric and duodenal lesions, as well as to compare LECS with pure endoscopic and pure laparoscopic procedures. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched. Efficacy (R0, recurrence) and safety (conversion rate, procedure and hospitalization time, adverse events, mortality) outcomes were extracted and pooled (odds ratio or mean difference) using a random-effects model. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and heterogeneity by Cochran’s Q test and I2 . Subgroup analysis according to location was performed. Results: This meta-analysis included 24 studies/1,336 patients (all retrospective cohorts). No significant differences were found between LECS and preexisting techniques (endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/laparoscopy) regarding any outcomes. However, there was a trend to shorter hospitalization time, longer procedure duration, and fewer adverse events in LECS versus Laparoscopy and ESD. R0 tended to be higher in the LECS group. Hospitalization time was significantly shorter in gastric versus EGJ lesions (mean 7.3 vs. 13.7 days, 95% CI: 6.6-7.9 vs. 8.9-19.3). There were no significant differences in conversion rate, adverse events, or mean procedural time according to location. There was a trend to higher conversion rate and longer procedure durations in EGJ and higher rate of adverse events in duodenal lesions. Conclusion: LECS is a valid, safe, and effective treatment option in patients with EGJ, gastric, and duo-denal lesions, although existing studies are retrospective and prone to selection bias. Prospective studies are needed to assess if LECS is superior to established techniques. Key Messages: LECS is safe and effective in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal lesions, but there is no evidence of superiority over established techniques.
publisher Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia
publishDate 2023
url http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452023000100004
work_keys_str_mv AT britosaraoliveirade efficacyandsafetyoflaparoscopicendoscopiccooperativesurgeryinuppergastrointestinallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT libaniodiogo efficacyandsafetyoflaparoscopicendoscopiccooperativesurgeryinuppergastrointestinallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pintoclaudiamartinsmarques efficacyandsafetyoflaparoscopicendoscopiccooperativesurgeryinuppergastrointestinallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT teixeirajoaopedropinhoosoriodearaujo efficacyandsafetyoflaparoscopicendoscopiccooperativesurgeryinuppergastrointestinallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT teixeirajoaopaulomeirelesdearaujo efficacyandsafetyoflaparoscopicendoscopiccooperativesurgeryinuppergastrointestinallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1772905162479763456