Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A literature review and meta-analysis was performed to assess for difference in rate of complications and need for revision surgery between endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy. The hypothesis was that endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of laryngology and otology 2023-07, Vol.137 (7), p.718-724
Main Authors: Edwards, D, Prades, E, Thorne, C, Harris, A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Carbon dioxide
Complications
Diverticulum
Endoscopy
Esophagoscopy - methods
Humans
Laser Therapy - adverse effects
Laser Therapy - methods
Lasers
Literature reviews
Meta-analysis
Patients
Pharyngeal Diseases - etiology
Pharynx
Postoperative
Retrospective Studies
Software
Statistical analysis
Surgeons
Surgery
Surgical techniques
Systematic review
Treatment Outcome
Zenker Diverticulum - surgery
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53
container_end_page 724
container_issue 7
container_start_page 718
container_title Journal of laryngology and otology
container_volume 137
creator Edwards, D
Prades, E
Thorne, C
Harris, A
description A literature review and meta-analysis was performed to assess for difference in rate of complications and need for revision surgery between endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy. The hypothesis was that endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy has a lower complication rate but endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy has a lower need for revision surgery. This was a systematic review of English-language studies comparing endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum. Meta-analysis of results with regard to rate of pharyngeal perforation, major post-operative complication and need for re-operation was performed. Nine retrospective studies were included with pooled analysis of 417 endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and 413 endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy cases. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in rate of pharyngeal perforation, major complication or need for re-operation between the two groups. This study demonstrated both endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy to be a safe alternative to open surgery for Zenker's diverticulum. Both appear to be similar in terms of adverse events and efficacy. The authors recommend either approach, guided by surgeon's preference and experience, where patients are unsuitable for an open surgery approach.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0022215122002377
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2737114918</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0022215122002377</cupid><sourcerecordid>2737114918</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtP3TAQhS3UCi6PH8AGWWIBmxQ_4jhmhxAFJKQuChs2kWNPUGgSB09y0f339RUXqFp1ZY_Pd45HM4QccvaNM67PfjImhOCKC5FuUustsuA6LzOVF-wLWazlbK3vkF3EZ8aSiYltsiMLWYpcqAUZrwYf0IWxdRQnO3YQ6RIizkg7i6nwbSqn1s1dmEK_ok2I9BGGXxBP8A9x7s-ppbjCCXqbXmiEZQuv1A6e9jDZzA62W2GL--RrYzuEg825Rx6-X91f3mR3P65vLy_uMie1nDLvCt8IX4JxggE0mrlGlYxLIZRotFPWC2VkXRpjitrntTHc5ExrxjkzoOQeOX3LHWN4mQGnqm_RQdfZAcKMldBSc54bXib0-C_0Ocwx9ZuoUipdmCIXieJvlIsBMUJTjbHtbVxVnFXrdVT_rCN5jjbJc92D_3C8zz8BchNq-zq2_gk-__5_7G9QRZTf</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2835769642</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>Cambridge University Press:Jisc Collections:Cambridge University Press Read and Publish Agreement 2021-24 (Reading list)</source><creator>Edwards, D ; Prades, E ; Thorne, C ; Harris, A</creator><creatorcontrib>Edwards, D ; Prades, E ; Thorne, C ; Harris, A</creatorcontrib><description>A literature review and meta-analysis was performed to assess for difference in rate of complications and need for revision surgery between endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy. The hypothesis was that endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy has a lower complication rate but endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy has a lower need for revision surgery. This was a systematic review of English-language studies comparing endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum. Meta-analysis of results with regard to rate of pharyngeal perforation, major post-operative complication and need for re-operation was performed. Nine retrospective studies were included with pooled analysis of 417 endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and 413 endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy cases. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in rate of pharyngeal perforation, major complication or need for re-operation between the two groups. This study demonstrated both endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy to be a safe alternative to open surgery for Zenker's diverticulum. Both appear to be similar in terms of adverse events and efficacy. The authors recommend either approach, guided by surgeon's preference and experience, where patients are unsuitable for an open surgery approach.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2151</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-5460</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0022215122002377</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36382425</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Bias ; Carbon dioxide ; Complications ; Diverticulum ; Endoscopy ; Esophagoscopy - methods ; Humans ; Laser Therapy - adverse effects ; Laser Therapy - methods ; Lasers ; Literature reviews ; Meta-analysis ; Patients ; Pharyngeal Diseases - etiology ; Pharynx ; Postoperative ; Retrospective Studies ; Software ; Statistical analysis ; Surgeons ; Surgery ; Surgical techniques ; Systematic review ; Treatment Outcome ; Zenker Diverticulum - surgery</subject><ispartof>Journal of laryngology and otology, 2023-07, Vol.137 (7), p.718-724</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9808-4171</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022215122002377/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,72960</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36382425$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Edwards, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prades, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorne, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, A</creatorcontrib><title>Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Journal of laryngology and otology</title><addtitle>J. Laryngol. Otol</addtitle><description>A literature review and meta-analysis was performed to assess for difference in rate of complications and need for revision surgery between endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy. The hypothesis was that endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy has a lower complication rate but endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy has a lower need for revision surgery. This was a systematic review of English-language studies comparing endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum. Meta-analysis of results with regard to rate of pharyngeal perforation, major post-operative complication and need for re-operation was performed. Nine retrospective studies were included with pooled analysis of 417 endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and 413 endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy cases. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in rate of pharyngeal perforation, major complication or need for re-operation between the two groups. This study demonstrated both endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy to be a safe alternative to open surgery for Zenker's diverticulum. Both appear to be similar in terms of adverse events and efficacy. The authors recommend either approach, guided by surgeon's preference and experience, where patients are unsuitable for an open surgery approach.</description><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Complications</subject><subject>Diverticulum</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Esophagoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laser Therapy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Laser Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Lasers</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pharyngeal Diseases - etiology</subject><subject>Pharynx</subject><subject>Postoperative</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical techniques</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Zenker Diverticulum - surgery</subject><issn>0022-2151</issn><issn>1748-5460</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kUtP3TAQhS3UCi6PH8AGWWIBmxQ_4jhmhxAFJKQuChs2kWNPUGgSB09y0f339RUXqFp1ZY_Pd45HM4QccvaNM67PfjImhOCKC5FuUustsuA6LzOVF-wLWazlbK3vkF3EZ8aSiYltsiMLWYpcqAUZrwYf0IWxdRQnO3YQ6RIizkg7i6nwbSqn1s1dmEK_ok2I9BGGXxBP8A9x7s-ppbjCCXqbXmiEZQuv1A6e9jDZzA62W2GL--RrYzuEg825Rx6-X91f3mR3P65vLy_uMie1nDLvCt8IX4JxggE0mrlGlYxLIZRotFPWC2VkXRpjitrntTHc5ExrxjkzoOQeOX3LHWN4mQGnqm_RQdfZAcKMldBSc54bXib0-C_0Ocwx9ZuoUipdmCIXieJvlIsBMUJTjbHtbVxVnFXrdVT_rCN5jjbJc92D_3C8zz8BchNq-zq2_gk-__5_7G9QRZTf</recordid><startdate>20230701</startdate><enddate>20230701</enddate><creator>Edwards, D</creator><creator>Prades, E</creator><creator>Thorne, C</creator><creator>Harris, A</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9808-4171</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230701</creationdate><title>Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Edwards, D ; Prades, E ; Thorne, C ; Harris, A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Complications</topic><topic>Diverticulum</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Esophagoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laser Therapy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Laser Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Lasers</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pharyngeal Diseases - etiology</topic><topic>Pharynx</topic><topic>Postoperative</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical techniques</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Zenker Diverticulum - surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Edwards, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prades, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorne, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harris, A</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of laryngology and otology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Edwards, D</au><au>Prades, E</au><au>Thorne, C</au><au>Harris, A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of laryngology and otology</jtitle><addtitle>J. Laryngol. Otol</addtitle><date>2023-07-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>137</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>718</spage><epage>724</epage><pages>718-724</pages><issn>0022-2151</issn><eissn>1748-5460</eissn><abstract>A literature review and meta-analysis was performed to assess for difference in rate of complications and need for revision surgery between endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy. The hypothesis was that endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy has a lower complication rate but endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy has a lower need for revision surgery. This was a systematic review of English-language studies comparing endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy for the treatment of Zenker's diverticulum. Meta-analysis of results with regard to rate of pharyngeal perforation, major post-operative complication and need for re-operation was performed. Nine retrospective studies were included with pooled analysis of 417 endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and 413 endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy cases. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in rate of pharyngeal perforation, major complication or need for re-operation between the two groups. This study demonstrated both endoscopic stapler-assisted diverticulotomy and endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulotomy to be a safe alternative to open surgery for Zenker's diverticulum. Both appear to be similar in terms of adverse events and efficacy. The authors recommend either approach, guided by surgeon's preference and experience, where patients are unsuitable for an open surgery approach.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>36382425</pmid><doi>10.1017/S0022215122002377</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9808-4171</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-2151
ispartof Journal of laryngology and otology, 2023-07, Vol.137 (7), p.718-724
issn 0022-2151
1748-5460
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2737114918
source Cambridge University Press:Jisc Collections:Cambridge University Press Read and Publish Agreement 2021-24 (Reading list)
subjects Bias
Carbon dioxide
Complications
Diverticulum
Endoscopy
Esophagoscopy - methods
Humans
Laser Therapy - adverse effects
Laser Therapy - methods
Lasers
Literature reviews
Meta-analysis
Patients
Pharyngeal Diseases - etiology
Pharynx
Postoperative
Retrospective Studies
Software
Statistical analysis
Surgeons
Surgery
Surgical techniques
Systematic review
Treatment Outcome
Zenker Diverticulum - surgery
title Endoscopic stapler versus laser diverticulotomy for Zenker's diverticulum: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T20%3A30%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Endoscopic%20stapler%20versus%20laser%20diverticulotomy%20for%20Zenker's%20diverticulum:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20laryngology%20and%20otology&rft.au=Edwards,%20D&rft.date=2023-07-01&rft.volume=137&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=718&rft.epage=724&rft.pages=718-724&rft.issn=0022-2151&rft.eissn=1748-5460&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0022215122002377&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2737114918%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-dc6df2d8e9c20eef70cf580132252f7c5ad2593b89996bd4b9919407701109e53%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2835769642&rft_id=info:pmid/36382425&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0022215122002377&rfr_iscdi=true