Recurrence rates after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 1 Factors influencing local recurrence for polyps ≥ 10 mm at 0–12 mo’ follow-up

Subgroups	LRR % (95%CI)	I2 %	Studies, n	Polyps, n
Resection method, polyps ≥ 10 mm
Hot EMR, no margin ablation	15.2 (12.5–18.0)	0	4	650
Hot EMR, some margin ablation	16.5 (15.2–17.8)	0	6	3013
Hot EMR, with margin ablation	3.3 (2.2–4.5)	NA	2	947
ESD	1.7 (0.0–3.4)	NA	3	221
Resection method, polyps ≥ 20 mm
Hot EMR, no margin ablation	14.8 (11.0–18.5)	NA	2	334
Hot EMR, some margin ablation	16.5 (15.2–17.8)	0	6	3013
Hot EMR, with margin ablation	3.3 (2.2–4.5)	NA	2	947
ESD	2.4 (0–5.7)	NA	2	83
Polyp size
≥ 10 mm	11.0 (7.1–14.8)	95.6	15	4904
≥ 20 mm	11.2 (6.8–15.6)	95.8	12	4431
Expert level
Only expert endoscopists	13.3 (11.1–15.6)	NA	2	3712
Including non-expert endoscopists	11.8 (6.8–16.8)	95.8	9	837
Not defined	9.2 (1.5–16.9)	93.7	4	524

NA: Number of studies insufficient for estimation; EMR: Endoscopic mucosal resection; ESD: Endoscopic submucosal dissection; LRR: Local recurrence rate.