Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Recent technical advances for safe and successful procedures

Table 3 Comparison of local recurrence rates after endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for removal of large colorectal tumors from previous single-center or multicenter studies

Ref.	Study design	Recurrence rate after EMR(En bloc resection with EMR)(Tumor size with EMR)	Recurrence rate after ESD(En bloc resection with ESD)(Tumor size with ESD)	P value
Saito et al[92]	S, R	14.0%; 33/228	2%; 3/145	P < 0.0001
		(33%; 74/228)	(84%; 122/145)	P < 0.0001
		(28 ± 8 mm)	(37 ± 14 mm)	P = 0.0006
Tajika et al[93]	S, R	15.4%; 16/104	1.2%; 1/85	P = 0.002
		(48.1%; 50/104)	(83.5%; 71/85)	P < 0.001
		(25.5 ± 6.8 mm)	(31.6 ± 9.0 mm)	P < 0.001
Terasaki et al[94]	S, R	8.0%; 14/176	0%; 0/56
		(39.3%; 70/178)
Lee et al[95]	S, R	25.7%; 29/113	0.8%; 2/257	P < 0.001
		(42.9%; 60/140)	(92.7%; 291/314)	P < 0.001
		(21.7 ± 3.5 mm)	(28.9 ± 12.7 mm)	P < 0.001
Oka et al[96]	M, P	6.8%; 55/808	1.4%; 10/716	P < 0.01
		(53.2%; 430/808)	(95.0%; 680/716)
		(32.8 ± 15.7 mm)	(39.6 ± 18.6 mm)	P < 0.01

S: Single center; M: Multicenter; R: Retrospective study; P: Prospective study; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection; EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; Tumor size: Mean ± SD.