Veeravich JaruvongvanichTomoki SempokuyaKarn WijarnpreechaPatompong UngprasertKing Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Chulalongkorn UniversityUniversity of Hawaii at ManoaFaculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol UniversityBassett Medical Center2019-08-282019-08-282018-03-01Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer. Vol.49, No.1 (2018), 16-2019416636194166282-s2.0-85041534434https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46913© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. Purpose: Peri-procedural heparin is recommended as bridging therapy for patients with high thromboembolic risk who need to withhold anticoagulant for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplasms. However, little is known about the bleeding risk from heparin-bridging therapy itself. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through August 2017 for studies that compared the risk of post-ESD bleeding in patients who received heparin-bridging therapy in lieu of anticoagulant for gastric neoplasms and those who discontinued anticoagulant without receiving heparin. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect model, generic inverse variance method. The between-study heterogeneity was quantified using the Q statistic and I 2 . Results: A total of four studies consisting of 350 patients were identified. A significantly increased risk of post-ESD bleeding among the bridged patients compared with the non-bridged patients was observed with the pooled RR of 2.99 (95% CI, 1.51 to 5.92). The statistical heterogeneity was insignificant with I 2 of 0%. Conclusions: A significantly increased risk of post-ESD bleeding among patients who received heparin-bridging therapy in lieu of anticoagulant compared to patients who did not receive it was demonstrated in this study.Mahidol UniversityMedicineReviewSCOPUS10.1007/s12029-017-0049-0