Researchers analyzed data from 570 patients with colorectal lesions to compare two different removal techniques: endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The study looked at how well each method worked, how long they took, and the safety risks involved for the patients.
The results showed that both methods were comparable in terms of successful removal rates and bleeding. However, the EFTR technique was associated with shorter procedure times and a lower risk of perforation. It also showed a lower incidence of post-polypectomy syndrome compared to the ESD method.
Because this is a meta-analysis based on five studies, the findings are useful for understanding trends but do not prove one method is better for everyone. Doctors suggest that while EFTR shows favorable short-term outcomes for small or difficult lesions, ESD remains an important tool for larger superficial growths. Patients should talk to their doctors to determine which technique is best for their specific condition.
