Does Prophylactic Closure Improve Outcomes After Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Several studies have described prophylactic closure after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of colorectal lesions for improving postoperative outcomes. We reviewed the evidence on the impact of prophylactic closure after ESD. Methods: A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science by 2 reviewers independently for studies published up to July 9, 2023. All types of comparative studies were eligible. Results: Ten studies compared 939 patients undergoing prophylactic closure with 1074 controls. Three were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) while the rest were observational. Pooled data from all included studies showed that prophylactic closure resulted in reduced incidence of delayed bleeding after ESD [odds ratio (OR): 0.30; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.72; I 2 =0%]. These results were significant only for observational studies but not for RCTs. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of delayed perforation (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.18, 1.70; I 2 =0%) or post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS) (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.41, 3.19; I 2 =63%) between closure and nonclosure groups. Conclusions: Observational data suggest that prophylactic closure of colorectal mucosal defects after ESD may reduce the risk of delayed bleeding. However, the results are not concurred by RCTs. Furthermore, there seems to be no impact of prophylactic closure on the risk of delayed perforation and PECS.