Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection for the removal of large nonpedunculated colon polyps.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zuchelli T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7805126 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and study aims Small colorectal polyps are removed by various methods, including cold snare polypectomy (CSP), hot snare polypectomy (HSP), and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR), but the indications for using these methods are unclear. We retrospectively assessed the efficacy of CSP, HSP, and UEMR for small polyps, focusing on the depth of the resected specimens. Patients and methods Outpatients with non-pedunculated small polyps (endoscopically diagnosed as 6 to 9 mm), resected by two endoscopists between July 2019 and September 2020, were enrolled. We histologically evaluated the specimens resected via CSP, HSP, and UEMR. The main outcome was the containment rate of the muscularis mucosa (MM) and submucosa (SM) tissues. Results Forty polyps resected via CSP (n = 14), HSP (n = 12), or UEMR (n = 14) were enrolled after excluding 13 polyps with resection depths that were difficult to determine. The rates of specimens containing MM and SM tissue differed significantly (57 % and 29 % for CSP, 92 % and 83 % for HSP, and 100 % and 100 % for UEMR, respectively ( P = 0.005 for MM and P < 0.001 for SM tissue). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed UEMR was an independent factor relating to the containment of SM tissue. The thickness of SM tissue by CSP, HSP, and UEMR were 52 μm, 623 μm, and 1119 μm, respectively ( P < 0.001). The thickness by CSP was significantly less than those by HSP and UEMR ( P < 0.001, Bonferroni correction). Conclusions UEMR could be the best method to contain SM tissue without injection. Further studies are needed to evaluate the indication of UEMR for small polyps.
| S-EPMC9106413 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colon polyps is challenging.ObjectiveTo determine if the time of day or daily endoscopic workload play a role in outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection for large non-pedunculated colon polyps greater than 20 mm.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of patients who underwent endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colon polyps. The time of day and endoscopic workload were compared across the following outcomes: the rate of complete resection of the polyp, the rate of referral for surgery, and the rate of residual neoplasia on follow-up.ResultsOne hundred and three endoscopic mucosal resection procedures were performed. There were no differences in the rates of complete resection (80.8% vs. 70.0%; P = 0.25), the need for surgery (27.4% vs. 33.3%; P = 0.55), and rate of residual neoplasia (24.5% vs. 50.0%; P = 0.07) when comparing the time of day. Colon polyps greater than 40 mm were less likely to be completely resected versus polyps sized 20-39 mm (56.8% vs. 91.9%; P < 0.001). In cases with no residual neoplasia on follow-up, the mean duration for the index procedure was 45.6 minutes versus 60.7 minutes when there was residual neoplasia (P < 0.01).ConclusionThe time of day and endoscopic workload does not affect outcomes for endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colon polyps, but the size of large non-pedunculated colon polyps and resection times do.
| S-EPMC6374846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Evidence from recent trials comparing conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to underwater EMR (UEMR) have matured. However, studies comparing UEMR to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are lacking. Hence, we sought to conduct a comprehensive network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of UEMR, ESD, and EMR. Methods Embase and Medline databases were searched from inception to December 2020 for articles comparing UEMR with EMR and ESD. Outcomes of interest included rates of en bloc and complete polyp resection, risk of perforation and bleeding, and local recurrence. A network meta-analysis comparing all three approaches was conducted. In addition, a conventional comparative meta-analysis comparing UEMR to EMR was performed. Analysis was stratified according to polyp sizes (< 10 mm, ≥ 10 mm, and ≥ 20 mm). Results Twenty-two articles were included in this study. For polyps ≥ 10 mm, UEMR was inferior to ESD in achieving en bloc resection ( P = 0.02). However, UEMR had shorter operating time for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P < 0.001), and ≥20 mm ( P = 0.019) with reduced perforation risk for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P = 0.05) compared to ESD. In addition, en bloc resection rates were similar between UEMR and EMR, although UEMR had reduced recurrence for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P = 0.013) and ≥ 20 mm ( P = 0.014). UEMR also had shorter mean operating than EMR for polyps ≥ 10 mm ( P < 0.001) and ≥ 20 mm ( P < 0.001). Risk of bleeding and perforation with UEMR and EMR were similar for polyp of all sizes. Conclusions UEMR has demonstrated technical and oncological outcomes comparable to ESD and EMR, along with a desirable safety profile. UEMR appears to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional methods for resection of polyps ≥ 10 mm.
| S-EPMC8759939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCold polypectomy has the advantages of simple operation, less time-consuming and fewer complications. Guidelines have recommended cold snare polypectomy (CSP) to resect small polyps sized ≤5 mm and sessile polyps sized 6-9 mm. However, evidence is scarce regarding cold resection for non-pedunculated polyps sized ≥10 mm. Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) combining CSP and submucosal injection was designed to improve the complete resection rate and reduce adverse events. We hypothesise that CS-EMR is non-inferior to conventional hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR) in the resection of 10-19 mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.Methods and analysisThis study is a prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, single-centre trial. Outpatients scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy and present eligible polyps will be randomised to receive either CS-EMR or HS-EMR. The primary endpoint is the complete resection. Considering that HS-EMR of 10-19 mm colorectal polyps will yield a complete resection rate of at least 92% and a non-inferiority margin of -10%, a total of 232 polyps will be included (one-sided α, 2.5%; β, 20%). The analyses are intended to evaluate first non-inferiority (lower limit 95% CI greater than -10% for group difference) and then superiority (lower limit 95% CI>0%) if non-inferiority is achieved. Secondary endpoints include en-bloc resection, the occurrence of adverse events, the use of endoscopic clips, resection time and cost.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the institutional review board of the Peking Union Medical College Hospital (No. K2203). All participants in the trial will provide written informed consent. The results of this trial will be published in an open-access way.Trial registration numberNCT05545787.
| S-EPMC10230935 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10872065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) > 20 mm in size can be challenging. Piecemeal EMR of these lesions results in high rates of adenoma recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy (SC1). Snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) of post resection margins is a safe and effective technique to prevent adenoma recurrence. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of this technique. Patients and methods Multiple databases were searched through April 2021 for studies that reported on outcomes of post EMR STSC for LSTs > 20 mm in size. Meta-analysis was performed to determine pooled odds of adenoma recurrence as well as pooled proportion of adverse events including intraprocedural and delayed bleeding as well as intraprocedural perforation events. Results Six studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCT) and four cohort studies with 2122 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall pooled odds of adenoma recurrence at SC1 with post EMR STSC compared to no STSC was 0.27 (95 % 0.18-0.42; I2 = 0 %), P < 0.001. Pooled rate of adenoma recurrence at SC1 in post EMR STSC cohort was 6 %. Rates of intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding and intraprocedural perforation were 10.3 %, 6.5 % and 2 % respectively. Conclusions Our results show that thermal ablation of resection margins with STSC in LSTs > 20 mm is a safe and effective technique in reducing the incidence of adenoma recurrence.
| S-EPMC8759936 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsBleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding.MethodsWe performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event.ResultsA total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%).ConclusionsIn a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01936948.
| S-EPMC8224988 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endoscopic removal of duodenal and colorectal adenomas is currently considered to be the standard of care for prevention of adenocarcinoma. The use of cautery carries a risk of delayed bleeding, post-polypectomy syndrome, and perforation. We examined the safety and feasibility of removing colonic and duodenal polyps ≥ 1 cm using a piecemeal cold snare polypectomy technique.The study included 15 patients with duodenal polyps ≥ 1 cm and 15 patients with colonic polyps ≥ 1 cm.Bleeding, perforation, abdominal pain, or hospitalization occurring within 2 weeks of polypectomy.Between 24 August 2011 and 29 April 2013, 15 patients had removal of duodenal polyps ≥ 1 cm. Mean patient age was 64 years and 9/15 patients were male. The mean polyp size was 24 mm (10 - 60 mm). All polyps were removed with a cold snare and some required cold biopsy forceps. One patient required hospitalization for gastrointestinal blood loss 7 days post-polypectomy; this patient was using Coumadin. Between 27 February 2012 and 30 May 2013, 15 patients underwent resection of a ≥ 1 cm colonic polyp. Mean patient age was 68 years and 9/15 were male. The mean polyp size was 20 mm (10 - 45 mm). All polyps were primarily removed with a cold snare. None of the patients required hemostatic clips for control of immediate bleeding. One patient presented to the emergency department with abdominal pain 1 day after initial endoscopy. CT scan showed no abnormalities and the patient was discharged.Cold snare polypectomy for large duodenal and colonic polyps is technically feasible and may have a favorable safety profile compared to standard electrocautery-based endoscopic resection. Comparative trials are required to determine the relative safety and efficacy of cold snare techniques for complete and durable resection of large polyps compared to standard hot snare methods.
| S-EPMC4612226 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background and aimsAll pedunculated colon polyps (PCPs) should ideally be resected en bloc for accurate histopathological evaluation. However, maneuvering a snare around the large head of a pedunculated polyp with a long, wide stalk can be technically challenging. In addition, clinically significant bleeding after snare polypectomy remains a legitimate concern. Small case series from Asia have supported the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the removal of these challenging large PCPs. However, ESD is not widely performed in the West because of its technical complexity, steep learning curve, and higher risk of adverse events when compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection. Our aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of performing en bloc resection of large PCPs using a scissor-type electrocautery ESD knife when conventional snare polypectomy is not feasible.MethodsTwo patients were found to have large PCPs with wide stalks. Attempts to maneuver a snare around the head of the PCP were unsuccessful, and the decision was to proceed with ESD using the scissor-type knife.ResultsBoth polyps were successfully resected en bloc using only the scissor-type knife. Both procedures were completed in under 20 minutes with no adverse events. Histopathology results of both polyps were consistent with tubulovillous adenoma with resection margins free of dysplasia, consistent with curative R0 resection.ConclusionEn bloc resection of large PCPs can be challenging when it is difficult to maneuver the snare around the head of the polyp. In this video, we demonstrate how a dedicated scissor-type ESD knife can facilitate the resection of these lesions. The insulated rotatable blades of the scissor-type knife allow safe and precise dissection of the stalk under direct visualization, which further permits targeted hemostasis when needed. Future studies are needed to corroborate the efficacy and safety of this device for the resection of selected colorectal lesions.
| S-EPMC7277036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Comparing the efficacy of cold snare polypectomy with endoscopic mucosal resection
| 2230090 | ecrin-mdr-crc