Risk factors for severe delayed postpolypectomy bleeding

Clinical Backgrounds and Outcomes of Elderly Japanese Patients with Gastrointestinal Bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Elderly gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) patients sometimes cannot be discharged home. In some cases, they die after hemostasis, even following appropriate treatment. This study investigates the clinical backgrounds and outcomes of elderly Japanese GIB patients.

METHODS

The medical records of 185 patients (123 men, 62 women; mean age 68.2 years; range 10-99 years) with GIB symptoms who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy to detect or treat the source of GIB were retrospectively reviewed. We compared the outcomes between patients ≤70 (n=85) and >70 (n=100) years. The clinical backgrounds of the patients who died or changed hospitals to undergo rehabilitation or receive palliative care were evaluated, as were the association of four factors with these poor outcomes: GIB (re-bleeding or uncontrolled bleeding), endoscopic procedure-related complications, exacerbation of the pre-existing comorbidity, and any complications that were not directly related to GIB.

RESULTS

Of the patients ≤70 and >70 years of age, three (3.5%) and 17 (17.0%), respectively, were transferred to another hospital (p=0.003). One (1.2%) and five (5.0%), respectively, died (p=0.144). All three patients ≤70 years old that changed hospitals did so because their comorbidities became worse. The reasons for changing hospitals in the 17 patients >70 years of age included exacerbation of a pre-existing comorbidity (41.1%, 7/17), other complications (35.4%, 6/17), GIB itself (17.6%, 3/17), and endoscopic procedure-related complications (5.9%, 1/17).

CONCLUSION

Although non-elderly and elderly GIB patients had similar mortality rates, many more elderly patients could not be discharged home for various reasons.

How to deal with large colorectal polyps: snare, endoscopic mucosal resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection; resect or refer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The importance of accurate polyp detection and removal is paramount to preventing colon cancer. Resection of large polyps can be challenging to the endoscopist based on their size, shape, or location. Large polyps have the potential of harboring malignancy and a higher risk of complications with resection. Careful assessment of each lesion and meticulous resection using the appropriate tools and techniques is essential.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last 15 years, the development of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) techniques has presented the endoscopist with the opportunity to manage patients with large and flat lesions thereby avoiding the need for surgery. However, these techniques are complex and require extensive knowledge and skill in the use of various devices to resect a lesion completely and manage bleeding and perforation associated with these procedures.

SUMMARY

Large colon polyps manifest as either polypoid or nonpolypoid (flat) lesions. Polypoid lesions, especially those with pedicles, are removed with snare resection, whereas flat lesions may require the use of EMR or ESD. Resection of large polyps (>1 cm) requires additional tools and techniques to ensure safe and complete resection. We will discuss our approach to dealing with large colorectal polyps: snare, EMR, and ESD; resect or refer?

Differences in Colonoscopy Quality Among Facilities: Development of a Post-Colonoscopy Risk-Standardized Rate of Unplanned Hospital Visits

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy is a common procedure, yet little is known about variations in colonoscopy quality among outpatient facilities. We developed an outcome measure to profile outpatient facilities by estimating risk-standardized rates of unplanned hospital visits within 7 days of colonoscopy.

METHODS

We used a 20% sample of 2010 Medicare outpatient colonoscopy claims (331,880 colonoscopies performed at 8140 facilities) from patients ≥65 years or older, and developed a patient-level logistic regression model to estimate the risk of unplanned hospital visits (ie, emergency department visits, observation stays, and inpatient admissions) within 7 days of colonoscopy. We then used the patient-level risk model variables and hierarchical logistic regression to estimate facility rates of risk-standardized unplanned hospital visits using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (325,811 colonoscopies at 992 facilities), from 4 states containing 100% of colonoscopies per facility.

RESULTS

Outpatient colonoscopies were followed by 5412 unplanned hospital visits within 7 days (16.3/1000 colonoscopies). Hemorrhage, abdominal pain, and perforation were the most common causes of unplanned hospital visits. Fifteen variables were independently associated with unplanned hospital visits (c = 0.67). A history of fluid and electrolyte imbalance (odds ratio [OR] = 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-1.58), psychiatric disorders (OR = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.22-1.46), and, in the absence of prior arrhythmia, increasing age past 65 years (aged >85 years vs 65-69 years: OR = 1.87; 95% CI: 1.54-2.28) were most strongly associated. The facility risk-standardized unplanned hospital visits calculated using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data showed significant variation (median 12.3/1000; 5th-95th percentile, 10.5-14.6/1000). Median risk-standardized unplanned hospital visits were comparable between ambulatory surgery centers and hospital outpatient departments (each was 10.2/1000), and ranged from 16.1/1000 in the Northeast to 17.2/1000 in the Midwest.

CONCLUSIONS

We calculated a risk-adjusted measure of outpatient colonoscopy quality, which shows important variation in quality among outpatient facilities. This measure can make transparent the extent to which patients require follow-up hospital care, help inform patient choices, and assist in quality-improvement efforts.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

Periprocedural management of aspirin during colonoscopy: a survey of practice patterns in the United States

BACKGROUND

The risk of postpolypectomy bleeding for patients taking aspirin is low, and gastroenterology society guidelines state that aspirin is likely safe to continue; however, many practices recommend aspirin discontinuation.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize practice patterns of periprocedural aspirin use with colonoscopy in the United States.

DESIGN

Survey study.

SETTING

Endoscopy units in the United States.

INTERVENTIONS

We reviewed colonoscopy preparation instruction sheets available online to characterize recommendations regarding periprocedural aspirin use. The endoscopy units that recommended discontinuation of aspirin before colonoscopy were contacted to determine their reasons for doing so. We also determined which endoscopy units were recognized by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) quality recognition program.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Endoscopy unit recommendations regarding aspirin use before colonoscopy.

RESULTS

We reviewed colonoscopy preparation instructions from 317 endoscopy units, of which 138 (43.5%) recommended continuing aspirin, 103 (32.5%) recommended stopping aspirin, and 76 (24%) requested patients to contact a physician. The most common reasons for recommending aspirin discontinuation were concern about bleeding after polypectomy (62%), perceived minimal downside to stopping aspirin (38%), inertia to changing old policies (20%), and concern about medicolegal implications of postpolypectomy bleeding (15%). There was no significant association between endoscopy unit recommendations about periprocedural aspirin use and ASGE quality certification (P = .17) or type of endoscopy facility (ambulatory surgical center vs hospital affiliated) (P = .55).

LIMITATION

Non-response bias.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of the endoscopy units surveyed in the United States routinely continue aspirin before screening colonoscopies despite evidence that benefits outweigh the risks. It is important for gastroenterology and cardiology societies to make a firm statement, educate their members, and give them confidence and support to continue aspirin periprocedurally.

Do We Perform a Perfect Endoscopic Hemostasis Prophylactically with Argon Plasma Coagulation in Colonic Endoscopic Mucosal Resection?

BACKGROUND

Submucosal injection for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) may effect performing the prophylactic argon plasma coagulation (APC) of non-bleeding visible vessels on ulcer crater.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical features of visible vessels in iatrogenic ulcers over time after prophylactic APC in colonic EMR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective study. Between August and November 2013, a total of 40 patients who were admitted underwent prophylactic APC for non-bleeding visible vessels after colonic EMR. After confirming whether visible vessels were completely coagulated or not, the number of visible vessels in ulcers was counted over a specific time period, e.g. 1, 3, 5, or 7 min.

RESULTS

The mean number of visible vessels was significantly higher at 5 min (0.85 ± 1.14) after EMR with prophylactic APC compared to 1 and 3 min (1 min: 0.28 ± 0.60, P < 0.001; 3 min: 0.65 ± 0.87, P = 0.02) and there was no significant difference between 5 and 7 min (P = 0.31). Multivariate analysis showed that the size of the iatrogenic ulcer after EMR was associated with the occurrence of visible vessels (ulcer size >1 vs. ≤0.5 cm: OR 27.32, 95% CI 2.86-infinity).

CONCLUSIONS

A 5-min observation of the ulcer may be advantageous for the assessment of visible vessels after performing colonic EMR with prophylactic APC, and large (>1 cm) iatrogenic ulcers were associated with the occurrence of visible vessels after colonic EMR.

Comparison of clipping with and without epinephrine injection for the prevention of post-polypectomy bleeding in pedunculated colon polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is the most common adverse event of colonoscopic polypectomy, especially in cases with large pedunculated polyps. To minimize the risk of PPB, several endoscopic preventive methods have been performed. The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the rates of PPB following single (clipping alone) and combined (clipping plus epinephrine-saline injection) methods in prevention of PPB in large pedunculated polyps.

METHODS

Adult patients with pedunculated colorectal polyps with heads ≥ 10 mm were prospectively enrolled from March 2011 to January 2013. Patients were randomized to receive treatment of either clips alone (group A) or clips plus injection of epinephrine-saline (group B) prior to a conventional polypectomy. PPB rate in both groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 148 patients with 173 pedunculated colorectal polyps were enrolled. Groups A and B each had 74 patients, with 83 and 90 polyps, respectively. The mean head diameters were 17.2 ± 6.6 and 17.5 ± 6.7 mm in groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.748). Immediate PPB (IPPB) occurred in 10 cases (12.0%) from group A and 13 cases (14.4%) from group B (P = 0.64). There were no cases of delayed PPB or perforation. Multivariate analysis showed that inadequate bowel preparation and large head diameter of polyp were independent risk factors for IPPB.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of IPPB is relatively high in cases with large pedunculated polyps, but these polyps can be successfully resected by snare polypectomy following use of the single prophylactic clipping method.

Endoscopic mucosal resection of early oesophageal neoplasia in patients requiring anticoagulation: is it safe?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has become the standard treatment for early oesophageal neoplasia. The mucosal defect caused by EMR usually takes several weeks to heal. Despite guidelines on high-risk endoscopic procedures in patients on anticoagulation, evidence is lacking whether EMR is safe in such patients. We investigated the immediate and delayed bleeding risk in patients undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic oesophageal EMR comparing patients requiring warfarin anticoagulation with a control group.

METHODS

Warfarin was stopped 5 days before the planned EMR and restarted on the evening following the procedure. Patients with high-risk conditions, such as recent pulmonary thromboemboli, received bridging with low molecular weight heparin. All EMRs were performed when the INR was <1.5. Bleeding events on the day of the EMR and within 3 months post-procedure were documented.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen consecutive patients with early oesophageal neoplasia were included. Sixty-eight EMRs were performed in 15 patients requiring anticoagulation. One patient on warfarin was readmitted 10 days after EMR with haematemesis and melaena. Out of 400 EMRs in 102 controls, 26 immediate bleeding events occurred requiring endoscopic intervention. One delayed bleeding event (melaena) occurred in the control group. The number of bleeding events did not differ between groups [p = 0.99; odds ratio 1.01 (0.30-3.44)], neither for acute (p = 0.76) nor delayed bleeding (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

EMR of early oesophageal neoplasia can be safely performed in patients requiring anticoagulation when warfarin is discontinued 5 days before the endoscopic intervention and reinstituted on the evening of the procedure day.

Complications during colonoscopy: prevention, diagnosis, and management

Colonoscopy is largely performed in daily clinical practice for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Although infrequent, different complications may occur during the examination, mostly related to the operative procedures. These complications range from asymptomatic and self-limiting to serious, requiring a prompt medical, endoscopic or surgical intervention. In this review, the complications that may occur during colonoscopy are discussed, with a particular focus on prevention, diagnosis, and therapeutic approaches.

Prevention of gastrointestinal events in patients on antithrombotic therapy in the peri-endoscopy period: review of new evidence and recommendations from recent guidelines

Management of patients on antithrombotic therapy undergoing endoscopic procedures can be challenging. Although guidelines from major gastrointestinal endoscopy societies provide useful recommendations in this regard, data are limited concerning the bleeding risk of new complex endoscopic procedures and the management of novel anticoagulants in patients needing invasive procedures. The approach to the management of antithrombotic therapy often needs to be formulated on an individual basis, especially in patients with high thrombotic risk undergoing a high-risk endoscopic procedure. In addition to the procedure-related bleeding risk, endoscopists also need to consider the urgency of the endoscopic procedure, the thromboembolic risk of the patient if antithrombotic therapy is temporarily withheld, and the timing of discontinuation/resumption of antithrombotic therapy in the decision-making process. Diagnostic endoscopic procedures with or without biopsy can often be done without interruption of antithrombotic therapy. If possible, elective procedures with high bleeding risk should be delayed in patients on antithrombotic therapy for conditions with high thrombotic risk. If high-risk procedures cannot be delayed in these patients, thienopyridines, traditional and novel anticoagulants are usually withheld, whereas aspirin withdrawal is decided on a case by case basis. In patients with high thrombotic risk, communication with the prescribing clinician before proceeding to procedures with high bleeding risk is particularly important in optimizing the peri-procedural management plan of antithrombotic therapy.

Patterns of antiplatelet agent use in the US

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) published updated guidelines in 2009 to help endoscopists manage the treatment of their patients who have been prescribed antiplatelet therapy (APT).

STUDY AIM

To assess the use of APT among endoscopists, and to identify factors guiding their use of APT while treating their patients.

METHOD

A survey questionnaire was distributed to endoscopists at two national meetings to assess their usage of APT while treating patients during the peri-endoscopic period.

RESULTS

The survey was provided to 400 attendees of whom 239 (60 %) responded. Only 30 % of respondents followed the ASGE guidelines for treating their patients and 26 % percent of respondents withheld all APT before engaging in any patient procedure. Endoscopists' decisions appeared to be influenced by their own particular experiences rather than any specific APT usage guidelines (46 % vs 22 %; P < 0.05). As expected, more endoscopists (P < 0.05) continued APT for patients who underwent low risk procedures (90 %) than for patients who underwent high risk procedures (47 %). Approximately 50 % of the respondents did not perform high risk procedures for patients prescribed aspirin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

About one-fourth of endoscopists surveyed discontinued APT treatment of patients who underwent any endoscopic procedure, and one-half of them discontinued use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug treatment of patients who underwent a high risk endoscopic procedure. Inappropriate withdrawal of APT medications may expose patients to unnecessary risks, and efforts to improve endoscopists' application of ASGE guidelines for the use of APT to treat patients during the peri-endoscopic period are warranted.

Prospective analysis of risk for bleeding after endoscopic biopsy without cessation of antithrombotics in Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In Japan, after the revision of the gastrointestinal endoscopic guidelines for patients taking antithrombotics, endoscopic biopsies were permitted while continuing antithrombotic treatment. However, the risk of bleeding after the biopsy with or without cessation of antithrombotics has not been fully evaluated because bleeding events are very rare. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the risk for bleeding after upper gastrointestinal biopsy without cessation of antithrombotics.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy from December 2011 to March 2014 were enrolled in this study. Antithrombotic medication and its cessation status was checked at enrollment. To confirm bleeding events associated with biopsy, medical examination at the hospital or direct confirmation by telephone was done within 1 month after the biopsy.

RESULTS

Among the 3758 patients who underwent endoscopic biopsies, 394 patients (10.5%) were medicated with antithrombotics, and 286 of them (72.6% of the total antithrombotics users) did not undergo cessation. Bleeding after the biopsy occurred in six cases (0.15%, 95% CI; 0.09%∼0.22%), but there was only one case that had continued taking antithrombotics. The incidence of bleeding after biopsy was not significantly higher in the patients who had continued taking antithrombotics compared with the others (0.35% vs 0.14%, P = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

This prospective study showed that continuation of antithrombotics did not increase the bleeding risk after upper gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy.

Risk factors for delayed post-polypectomy bleeding

Background/Aims

Among the many complications that can occur following therapeutic endoscopy, bleeding is the most serious, which occurs in 1.0-6.1% of all colonoscopic polypectomies. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy between January 2003 and December 2012. We compared patients who experienced delayed PPB with those who did not. The control-to-patient ratio was 3:1. The clinical data analyzed included polyp size, number, location, and shape, patient' body mass index (BMI), preventive hemostasis, and endoscopist experience.

Results

Of 1,745 patients undergoing colonoscopic polypectomy, 21 (1.2%) experienced significant delayed PPB. We selected 63 age- and sex-matched controls. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that polyps >10 mm (odds ratio [OR], 2.605; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.035-4.528; P=0.049), a pedunculated polyp (OR, 3.517; 95% CI, 1.428-7.176; P=0.045), a polyp located in the right hemicolon (OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.291-5.761; P=0.013), and a high BMI (OR, 3.681; 95% CI, 1.876-8.613; P=0.013) were significantly associated with delayed PPB.

Conclusions

Although delayed PPB is a rare event, more caution is needed during colonoscopic polypectomies performed in patients with high BMI or large polyps, pedunculated polyps, or polyps located in the right hemicolon.

[Management of new oral anticoagulants in gastrointestinal bleeding and endoscopy]

New oral direct anticoagulants agents are alternatives to warfarin for long-term anticoagulation in a growing number of patients that require long-term anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. These new agents with predictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics profiles offer a favorable global safety profile, but increased gastrointestinal bleeding compared to the vitamin K antagonists. Many gastroenterologists are unfamiliar and may be wary of these newer drugs, since Clinical experience is limited and no specific antidote is available to reverse their anticoagulant effect. In this article the risk of these new agents and, how to manage these agents in both the presence of acute gastrointestinal bleeding and in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures is reviewed.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients with colorectal lesions undergoing endoscopic resection

AIM: To investigate the effect of prophylaxis with antibiotics on clinical adverse events in patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for colorectal lesions.

METHODS: From June 2011 to December 2013, a total of 428 patients were enrolled into the study, of which 214 patients admitted to hospital underwent EMR or ESD procedures. These patients were randomized to an antibiotic group, in which patients were given cefuroxime 1.5 g iv half an hour before and 6 h after surgery respectively, and a control group, in which patients were not given any antibiotic. A further 214 outpatients with small polyps treated by polypectomy were compared with controls that were matched by age and gender, and operations were performed as outpatient surgery. Recorded patient parameters were demographics, characteristics of lesions and treatment modality, and the size of the wound area. The primary outcome measures were clinical adverse events, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, hemotachezia, and fever. Secondary outcome measures were white blood cell count, C-reactive protein and blood culture. Additionlly, the relationship between the size of the wound area and clinical adverse events was analyzed.

RESULTS: A total of 409 patients were enrolled in this study, with 107 patients in the control group, 107 patients in the antibiotic group, and another 195 cases in the follow-up outpatient group. The patients’ demographic characteristics, including age, gender, characteristics of lesions, treatment modality, and the size of the wound area were similar between the 2 groups. The rates of adverse events in the antibiotic group were significantly lower than in the control group: abdominal pain (2.8% vs 14.9%, P < 0.01), diarrhea (2.0% vs 9.3%, P < 0.05), and fever (0.9% vs 8.4%, P < 0.05) respectively. The levels of inflammatory markers also decreased significantly in the antibiotic group compared with the control group: leukocytosis (2.0% vs 11.2%, P < 0.01), and C-reactive protein (2.0% vs 10.7%, P < 0.05). Additionally, clinical adverse events were related to the size of the surgical wound area. When the surgical wound area was larger than 10 mm × 10 mm, there were more clinical adverse events.

CONCLUSION: Clinical adverse events are not uncommon after EMR or ESD procedures. Prophylactic antibiotics can reduce the incidence of clinical adverse events. This should be further explored.

Management of polypectomy complications

The 2 most significant complications of colonoscopy with polypectomy are bleeding and perforation. Incidence rates for bleeding (0.1%-0.6%) and perforation (0.7%-0.9%) are generally low. Recognition of pertinent risk factors helps to prevent these complications, which can be grouped into patient-related, polyp-related, and technique/device-related factors. Endoscopists should be equipped to manage bleeding and perforation. Currently available devices and techniques are reviewed to achieve hemostasis and close colon perforations.

A randomized study on the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping during endoscopic resection of colon polyps for the prevention of delayed bleeding

BACKGROUNDS

The efficacy of clipping for preventing the delayed bleeding after the removal of colon polyps is still controversial. In order to clarify this efficacy, a randomized controlled study was performed.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-six patients with colon neoplasms (288 lesions) were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: clipping or nonclipping groups using a sealed envelope method before the endoscopic resections. Eight specialists and nine residents were invited to perform this procedure. The risk factors and the rates of delayed bleeding after the endoscopic resections in each group were investigated.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the bleeding rate between the clipping and nonclipping groups, while the length of the procedure was significantly longer and the cost was higher in the clipping group than in the nonclipping group. The rate of bleeding was significantly higher in cases with polyps 2 cm or larger and with a longer procedure time, while none of the other factors affected the bleeding rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized controlled study revealed no significant effect of prophylactic clipping for preventing delayed bleeding after the endoscopic resection of colon polyps.

Optimal timing for resuming antithrombotic agents and risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic resection of colorectal tumors

Aim. To examine optimal timing for resuming antithrombotic agents and risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic resection of colorectal tumors. Method. Of 1,970 polyps larger than 10 mm removed by polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, or endoscopic submucosal dissection, delayed bleeding, which was designated as bleeding that occurred 6 or more hours after endoscopic treatment, occurred in 52 cases (2.6%); 156 nonbleeding cases matched for age and gender were controls in this single-institution retrospective case-control study. We investigated (1) patient-factors: resuming antithrombotic agents within 5 days following endoscopic resection, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus; and (2) tumor-factors: morphology, size, location, and resection technique by conditional logistic regression. Results. By multivariate analysis resumption of anticoagulants within 5 days was a significant risk factor for delayed bleeding (OR 10.2; 95% CI = 2.7-38.3; P = 0.0006). But resuming a thienopyridine within 5 days was not (OR 0.9; 95% CI = 0.1-2.6; P = 0.40). Other patient- and tumor-factors were not significant. Conclusion. Resuming anticoagulants within 5 days after endoscopic treatment was associated with delayed bleeding whereas resuming thienopyridines was not.

Management of bleeding and perforation after colonoscopy

Bleeding is a relatively rare complication occurring mainly after snare polypectomy. The majority of cases can be managed successfully by endoscopic means leaving very few cases which will ultimately need an operation. Colonic perforation, on the other hand is a serious complication that requires intensive and careful management. Prompt recognition of the perforation during the procedure allows, in selected cases, immediate endoscopic closure with an uneventful and full recovery followed by close monitoring and surgical management in case of clinical deterioration. The criteria for the right selection of perforation cases amenable to endoscopic treatment do still need to be confirmed by prospective studies and further experience is required before a standard algorithm on the endoscopic management of perforations is developed.

Assessment of risk factors for delayed colonic post-polypectomy hemorrhage: a study of 15553 polypectomies from 2005 to 2013

Background and Aim

Delayed colonic postpolypectomy bleeding is the commonest serious complication after polypectomy. This study aimed to utilize massive sampling data of polypectomy to analyze risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding.

Patients and Methods

The endoscopic data of 5600 patients with 15553 polyps removed (2005 to 2013) were analyzed retrospectively through univariate analysis and multiple logistic regression analysis to evaluate the risk factors for delayed bleeding.

Results

Delayed postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 99 polyps (0.6%). The rates of bleeding for different polypectomy methods including hot biopsy forcep, biopsy forcep, Argon Plasma Coagulation (APC), Endoscopy piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR), Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), and snare polypectomy were 0.1%, 0.0%, 0.0%, 6.9%, 0.9% and 1.0%, respectively. The risk factors for delayed bleeding were the size of polyps over 10 mm (odds ratio [OR] = 4.6, 95% CI, 2.9–7.2), pathology of colonic polyps (inflammatory/hyperplastic, OR = 1; adenomatous, OR = 1.4, 95% CI, 0.7–2.6; serrated, OR = 1.5, 95% CI, 0.2–11.9; juvenile, OR = 4.3, 95% CI, 1.8–11.0; Peutz-Jegher, OR = 3.3, 95% CI, 1.0–10.7), and immediate postpolypectomy bleeding (OR = 2.9, 95% CI, 1.4–5.9). In addition, although polypectomy method was not a risk factor, compared with hot biopsy forcep, snare polypectomy, EMR, and EPMR had increased risks of delayed bleeding, with ORs of 3.2 (0.4–23.3), 2.8 (0.4–21.7) and 5.1 (0.5–47.7), respectively.

Conclusion

Polyp size over 10 mm, pathology of colonic polyps (especially juvenile, Peutz-Jegher), and immediate postpolypectomy bleeding were significant risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding.

Incidence and risk factors of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIM

Delayed bleeding is a serious complication that occurs after polypectomy. Many risk factors for delayed bleeding have been suggested, but there is little analysis of procedure-related risk factors. The purpose of this study is to identify a wide range of risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) and analyze the correlations of those potential DPPB risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, 5981 polypectomies in 3788 patients were evaluated between January 2010 and February 2012. Patient-related, polyp-related, and procedure-related factors were evaluated as potential DPPB risk factors.

RESULTS

Delayed bleeding occurred in 42 patients (1.1%). Multivariate analysis revealed that polyp size >10 mm [odds ratio (OR), 2.785; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.406-5.513; P=0.003], location in the right hemi-colon (OR, 2.289; 95% CI, 1.117-4.693; P=0.024), and endoscopist's experience (<300 total cases of colonoscopy performed; OR, 4.803; 95% CI, 2.631-8.766; P=0.001) were significant risk factors for DPPB. Especially protruded type polyps (Ip, Isp) larger than 1 cm in the right-side colon were associated with increased risk. Right-side polypectomy by a nonexpert endoscopist was a significant risk factor for DPPB, especially with procedures in the cecum area. Taking the 1.5% DPPB incidence as cutoff value, the learning curve of colonoscopic polypectomy may be estimated as 400 cases of polypectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Polyp size, endoscopist's experience, and right hemi-colon location were identified as potential risk factors for DPPB development.

Child-Pugh score is an independent risk factor for immediate bleeding after colonoscopic polypectomy in liver cirrhosis

PURPOSE

Post-polypectomy bleeding is the most common colonoscopic polypectomy complication. However, the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding in liver cirrhosis is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 89 patients with liver cirrhosis who received colonoscopic polypectomy between January 2006 and October 2012. Three hundred forty-eight subjects without liver disease who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy comprised the control group. Risks of post-polypectomy bleeding were analyzed according to patient- and polyp-related factors.

RESULTS

Among 89 patients, 75 (84.3%) were Child-Pugh class A, 10 (11.2%) were class B, and 4 (4.5%) were class C. Incidence of immediate post-polypectomy bleeding was significantly increased in cirrhosis with Child-Pugh class B or C compared to liver cirrhosis with Child-Pugh class A or control group [hazard ratio (HR) 3.5; p<0.001]. Polyp size (HR 3.6; p=0.032) and pedunculated polyps (HR 2.4; p=0.022) were also significant risk factors for immediate post-polypectomy bleeding in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Cirrhotic patients with Child-Pugh class B or C have a high risk of immediate post-polypectomy bleeding. Thus, endoscopists should be cautious about performing colonoscopic polypectomy in patients with Child-Pugh class B or C.

A management algorithm based on delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Bleeding is the main complication of wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for large colonic lesions. Few studies have examined bleeding outcomes after WF-EMR, and there are no evidence-based guidelines for management of bleeding in this group. We analyzed outcomes of patients with clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) and present a management algorithm based on our findings.

METHODS

In a prospective study, we collected data from WF-EMR of sessile colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger from 1039 patients who participated in the Australian Colonic Endoscopic resection multicenter study from July 2008 through May 2012. Data included patient and lesion characteristics and procedural, clinical, and histologic outcomes. Patients participated in a structured telephone interview 14 days after the procedure; independent predictors of a moderate or severe outcome by American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopists criteria, or any intervention for hemostasis, were identified.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients had CSPEB (6.0%); 34 were managed conservatively (55%) and 27 underwent colonoscopy (44%). One patient had primary embolization. Endoscopic therapy was applied in 21 cases; 14 had active bleeding. Two of the conservatively managed cases underwent colonoscopy for rebleeding after discharge. On multivariable analysis, moderate or severe bleeding events were associated with hemodynamic instability (odds ratio, 12.3; P = .046) and low level of hemoglobin at presentation (odds ratio, 0.50 per 1.0 g/dL; P = .005). Intervention for hemostasis was associated with hourly or more frequent hematochezia (odds ratio, 36.7; P = .001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 2 or higher (odds ratio, 20.1; P < .001), and transfusion (odds ratio, 18.7; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a multicenter prospective study, CSPEB resolves spontaneously in 55% of patients. We developed a risk factor-based algorithm that might assist physicians in the management of bleeding. Patients responding to initial resuscitation can be observed, with a lower threshold for intervention in those with the identified risk factors.

Advances, problems, and complications of polypectomy

The major role of colonoscopy with polypectomy in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer has been firmly established. Yet there is cause to be uneasy. One of the most striking recent findings is that there is an alarmingly high incomplete polyp removal rate. This phenomenon, together with missed polyps during screening colonoscopy, is thought to be responsible for the majority of interval cancers. Knowledge of serrated polyps needs to broaden as well, since they are quite often missed or incompletely removed. Removal of small and diminutive polyps is almost devoid of complications. Cold snare polypectomy seems to be the best approach for these lesions, with biopsy forcep removal reserved only for the tiniest of polyps. Hot snare or hot biopsy forcep removal of these lesions is no longer recommended. Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection have proven to be effective in the removal of large colorectal lesions, avoiding surgery in the majority of patients, with acceptably low complication rates. Variants of these approaches, as well as new hybrid techniques, are being currently tested. In this paper, we review the current status of the different approaches in removing polypoid and nonpolypoid lesions of the colon, their complications, and future directions in the prevention of colorectal cancer.

Risk factors for intraprocedural and clinically significant delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of large sessile colonic polyps is a safe and cost-effective outpatient treatment. Bleeding is the main complication. Few studies have examined risk factors for bleeding during the procedure (intraprocedural bleeding [IPB]) or after it (clinically significant post-endoscopic bleeding [CSPEB]). We investigated factors associated with IPB and CSPEB in a large prospective study.

METHODS

We analyzed data from WF-EMRs of sessile colorectal polyps ≥ 20 mm in size (mean size, 35.5 mm), which were performed on 1172 patients (mean age, 67.8 years) from June 2008-March 2013 at 7 tertiary hospitals as part of the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection Study. Data were collected on characteristics of patients and lesions, along with outcomes of procedures and clinical and histologic analyses. Independent predictors of IPB and CSPEB were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the patients studied, 133 (11.3%) had IPB. Independent predictors included increasing lesion size (odds ratio, 1.24/10 mm; P < .001), Paris endoscopic classification of 0-IIa + Is (odds ratio, 2.12; P = .004), tubulovillous or villous histology (odds ratio, 1.84; P = .007), and study institutions that performed the procedure on fewer than 75 patients (odds ratio, 3.78; P < .001). All IPB was successfully controlled endoscopically. IPB prolonged procedures and was associated with early recurrence (relative risk, 1.68; P = .011). Seventy-three patients (6.2%) had CSPEB. On multivariable analysis, CSPEB was associated with proximal colon location (odds ratio, 3.72; P < .001), use of an electrosurgical current not controlled by a microprocessor (odds ratio, 2.03; P = .038), and IPB (odds ratio, 2.16; P = .016). Lesion size and comorbidities did not predict CSPEB.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study of patients undergoing WF-EMR of large sessile colonic polyps, IPB is associated with larger lesions, lesion histology, and Paris endoscopic classification of type 0-IIa + Is. IPB prolongs the duration of the procedure, is a marker for recurrence, and is associated with CSPEB. CSPEB occurs most frequently in the proximal colon and less when current is controlled by a microprocessor.

Clinical features of post-polypectomy bleeding associated with heparin bridge therapy

BACKGROUND

Heparin is given to patients undergoing colonoscopic polypectomy at high risk for thromboembolism. Little is known, however, about how heparin bridge therapy (HB) affects post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB). The present study aimed to identify the clinical features of PPB associated with HB.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data of consecutive inpatients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy with antithrombotic therapy at Osaka University Hospital were retrospectively collected and categorized into a HB group or a non-HB group. The incidence and characteristics of PPB were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients with 279 lesions were identified, and the HB group included 45 patients. Nine of 10 patients with PPB were in the HB group, and the incidence of PPB was significantly higher in the HB group than in the non-HB group (20.0% vs 1.4%, respectively). PPB onset was later in the HB group than inthe non-HB group (median postoperative day: 4 vs 1, respectively). Five of the nine patients with PPB (55.6%) in the HB group experienced recurrent bleeding. One patient in the HB group required a blood transfusion as a result of massive PPB. All bleeding was eventually controlled endoscopically. Hospitalization was significantly longer in the HB group than in the non-HB group (median hospitalization: 14 vs 4 days, respectively). The univariate analysis showed that the predictors of PPB were warfarin use, HB and pedunculated polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

PPB associated with HB is characterized by high incidence, late onset and recurrent bleeding, resulting in long hospitalization.

Risk factors for bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of colorectal neoplasms

AIM: To investigate the risk factors for delayed bleeding following endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) treatment for colorectal neoplasms.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 317 consecutive patients with 325 lesions who underwent ESD for superficial colorectal neoplasms at our hospital from January 2009 to June 2013. Delayed post-ESD bleeding was defined as bleeding that resulted in overt hematochezia 6 h to 30 d after ESD and the observation of bleeding spots as confirmed by repeat colonoscopy or a required blood transfusion. We analyzed the relationship between risk factors for delayed bleeding following ESD and the following factors using univariate and multivariate analyses: age, gender, presence of comorbidities, use of antithrombotic drugs, use of intravenous heparin, resected specimen size, lesion size, lesion location, lesion morphology, lesion histology, the device used, procedure time, and the presence of significant bleeding during ESD.

RESULTS: Delayed post-ESD bleeding was found in 14 lesions from 14 patients (4.3% of all specimens, 4.4% patients). Patients with episodes of delayed post-ESD bleeding had a mean hemoglobin decrease of 2.35 g/dL. All episodes were treated successfully using endoscopic hemostatic clips. Emergency surgery was not required in any of the cases. Blood transfusion was needed in 1 patient (0.3%). Univariate analysis revealed that lesions located in the cecum (P = 0.012) and the presence of significant bleeding during ESD (P = 0.024) were significantly associated with delayed post-ESD bleeding. The risk of delayed bleeding was higher for larger lesion sizes, but this trend was not statistically significant. Multivariate analysis revealed that lesions located in the cecum (OR = 7.26, 95%CI: 1.99-26.55, P = 0.003) and the presence of significant bleeding during ESD (OR = 16.41, 95%CI: 2.60-103.68, P = 0.003) were independent risk factors for delayed post-ESD bleeding.

CONCLUSION: Location in the cecum and significant bleeding during ESD predispose patients to delayed post-procedural bleeding. Therefore, careful and additional management is recommended for these patients.

Quality in colonoscopy: European perspectives and practice

Colonoscopy is the 'gold standard' investigation of the colon. High quality colonoscopy is essential to diagnose early cancer and reduce its incidence through the detection and removal of pre-malignant adenomas. In this review, we discuss the key components of a high quality colonoscopy, review methods for improving quality, emerging technologies that have the potential to improve quality and highlight areas for future work.

Severe delayed postpolypectomy bleeding in elder patient with post-polycythemia myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND

The interest of the case lies in an unexpected delayed bleeding following an endoscopic procedure in a patient with post-polycythemia myelofibrosis. The case gives the opportunity to discuss the medical management and monitoring of patients with myeloproliferative disorders undergoing minimally invasive surgery interventions.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 75 years old woman affected by post-polycythemia myelofibrosis underwent endoscopy polypectomy followed by a delayed major local bleeding. At the time of the endoscopy followed by bleeding, the platelet count was 837 × 109/L, haemoglobin 113 g/L, PCV 35,2% and WBC 20.22 × 106/L. No antithrombotic prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin was used. Antiplatelet drug was withdraw seven days before endoscopy and restarted one week after the procedure. Polyp size was 11 x 19 mm and it was located on right side of the colon.

CONCLUSION

There are some patients in whom current guidelines do not apply and our case stress the importance of myeloproliferative neoplasms as a risk factor for complications of endoscopic polypectomy. The delayed haemorrhage we observed suggest to strictly control the patient for a period longer than only one week also in case of antithrombotic treatment with antiplatelet drugs.

Management of antithrombotic agents for colonoscopic polypectomies in Israeli gastroenterologists relative to published guidelines

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic procedures are commonly performed in patients taking antithrombotic agents.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the correlation between the management of antithrombotic drugs for colonoscopic polypectomies and the published guidelines.

DESIGN AND SETTINGS

A structured survey delivered to gastroenterologists in 15 major Israeli hospitals and three central HMO clinics.

RESULTS

We collected 100 filled out surveys. Polypectomies on aspirin were performed by 78%. Most physicians did not perform polypectomies on clopidogrel. None of the physicians performed polypectomies on warfarin. Cessation of aspirin for ≥ 3 days post-polypectomy was recommended by 60%. Renewal of LMWH or warfarin was recommended ≥ 2 days post-polepectomy in 91% and 71%, respectively. The greatest variation in recommendations was found for clopidogrel, where the majority of gastroenterologists advised renewal after 1-2 days (38%). Years in practice and increasing colonoscopy volume work had no significant association with management of antithrombotic agents. Working in a HMO clinic was associated with lower rates of polypectomies on aspirin (P=0.036).

DISCUSSION

When the guidelines are clear, most gastroenterologists practice according to the existing recommendation. However, lack of prospective studies limits the ability to publish evidence-based recommendation and guidelines. We found that the practice of our cohort study varies in these situations.

Continued use of low-dose aspirin does not increase the risk of bleeding during or after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Although recent guidelines for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC) recommend noninterruption of low-dose aspirin (LDA) perioperatively, this strategy is controversial. It was our practice to interrupt LDA therapy 5-7 days before to ESD until December 2010, when we instituted the new guidelines and performed ESD without interrupting LDA therapy. Our purpose in this study was to confirm the validity of noninterrupted use of LDA in patients undergoing ESD for EGC.

METHODS

We studied 78 consecutive patients with 94 EGCs who were routinely taking LDA and were treated by ESD at Hiroshima University Hospital between April 2005 and June 2012. The patients were of two groups: those in whom LDA was interrupted perioperatively (53 patients with 66 EGCs) and those in whom LDA was continued perioperatively (25 patients with 28 EGCs).

RESULTS

The complete resection rate was 92.4 % (61/66) in the LDA-interrupted group and 100 % (28/28) in the LDA-continued group. Incidences of poor bleeding control during the procedure and bleeding after procedure were 10.6 % (7/66) and 4.8 % (3/66), respectively, in the LDA-interrupted group and 7.1 % (2/28) and 3.6 % (1/28) in the LDA-continued group. Two patients in the interrupted-LDA group suffered cerebrovascular infarction before ESD, and 2 patients in this group suffered acute myocardial infarction after ESD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that continued use of LDA does not increase the risk of bleeding during or after ESD for EGC and does decrease the risk of ischemic events.

A cost-efficacy decision analysis of prophylactic clip placement after endoscopic removal of large polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Delayed bleeding after lower endoscopy and polypectomy can cause significant morbidity. One strategy to reduce bleeding is to place an endoscopic clip on the polypectomy site. We used decision analysis to investigate the cost-effectiveness of routine clip placement after colon polypectomy.

METHODS

Probabilities and plausible ranges were obtained from the literature, and a decision analysis was conducted by using TreeAge Pro 2011 Software. Our cost-effectiveness threshold was an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year. The reference case was a 50-year-old patient who had a single 1.0- to 1.5-cm polyp removed during colonoscopy. We estimated postpolypectomy bleeding rates for patients receiving no medications, those with planned resumption of antiplatelet therapy (nonaspirin), or those receiving anticoagulation therapy after polypectomy. We performed several sensitivity analyses, varying the cost of a clip and hospitalization, number of clips placed, clip effectiveness in reducing postpolypectomy bleeding, reduction in patient utility days related to gastrointestinal bleeding, and probability of harm from clip placement.

RESULTS

On the basis of the reference case, when patients did not receive anticoagulation therapy, clip placement was not cost-effective. However, for patients who did receive anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies, prophylactic clip placement was a cost-effective strategy. The cost-effectiveness of a prophylactic clip strategy was sensitive to the costs of clips and hospitalization, number of clips placed, and clip effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a prophylactic endoscopic clip after polypectomy appears to be a cost-effective strategy for patients who receive antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy. This approach should be studied in a controlled trial.

Low rate of postpolypectomy bleeding among patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear whether the cardiovascular risk of discontinuing treatment with antiplatelet agents, specifically the thienopyridines, before elective colonoscopy outweighs the risks of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). We studied the rate of PPB in patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 516 patients not taking warfarin who received polypectomies during elective colonoscopies; 219 were receiving thienopyridines, and 297 were not (controls). The occurrence of immediate PPB and delayed PPB was recorded. Delayed PPB was categorized as clinically important if it resulted in repeat colonoscopy, hospitalization, or blood transfusion.

RESULTS

Patients receiving thienopyridines were older and had significantly more comorbid diseases than controls; the mean number of polyps removed per patient was significantly higher (3.9 vs 2.9) in the thienopyridine group. Immediate PPB developed in 16 patients in the thienopyridine group (7.3%) and in 14 in the control group (4.7%, P = .25). Among patients who completed a 30-day follow-up analysis (96% of patients enrolled), clinically important, delayed bleeding occurred in 2.4% of patients receiving thienopyridines and in none of the controls (P = .01). All PPB events in both groups were resolved without surgery, angiography, or death.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a significantly higher percentage of patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy and polypectomy develop clinically important delayed PPB than patients who discontinue therapy, the rate of PPB events is low (2.4%), and all are resolved without sequelae. The risk for catastrophic cardiovascular risks among patients who discontinue thienopyridine therapy before elective colonoscopies could therefore exceed the risks of PPB. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT01647568.

Complications of colonoscopy

Colonoscopy is a relatively invasive modality for the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal disease and for the prevention or early detection of colorectal neoplasia. Millions of colonoscopies are performed each year in the United States by endoscopists with varying levels of skill in colons that present varying levels of challenge. Although better scope technology has made colonoscopy gentler and more accurate, the sheer number of examinations performed means that complications inevitably occur. This article considers the most common complications of colonoscopy, and advises how to minimize their incidence and how to treat them if they do occur.

Preprocedural considerations in gastrointestinal endoscopy

The current practice of open-access endoscopy allows primary care and other non-gastroenterology physicians to directly refer patients for routine gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. Open-access endoscopy is considered to be more cost-effective and time efficient than the traditional practice of referring patients for preprocedural consultation with a gastrointestinal endoscopist. Several studies have evaluated the performance of endoscopic procedures in an open-access environment and the utility of structured referral mechanisms to ensure safe and appropriately indicated procedures. This review focuses on 4 common preprocedural issues in gastrointestinal endoscopy encountered by primary care physicians: management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, indication for prophylactic antibiotic drug therapy, need for anesthesia-assisted sedation, and management of poor bowel preparation. We summarize the current guidelines that address these 4 common preprocedural issues to facilitate safe and clinically appropriate procedures in open-access endoscopy.

Colonoscopic polypectomy: current techniques and controversies

Colonoscopic polypectomy is fundamental to effective colonoscopy. Through its impact on the polyp-cancer sequence, colonoscopic polypectomy reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Because it eliminates electrosurgical risk, cold snaring has emerged as the preferred technique for most small and all diminutive polyps. Few clinical trial data are available on the effectiveness and safety of specific techniques. Polypectomy technique seems highly variable between endoscopists, with some techniques more effective than others are. Further research is needed to investigate operator variation in polypectomy outcomes and establish an evidence base for best practice.

Risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding: how to minimize your patients' risk

PURPOSE

Secondary bleeding after colonoscopic polypectomy is a serious complication. Most studies show polyp size, location, and shape to be important risk factors but other factors may allow refinement of risk. The aim of this study is to look for other factors associated with delayed postpolypectomy bleeding.

METHODS

This case-matched study compares patients who developed postpolypectomy bleeding with those who underwent uncomplicated polypectomy. Matching was performed for known risk factors: polyp size, location and shape, with a ratio of three controls to one subject.

RESULTS

Postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 19/494 patients with polyps >2.0 cm diameter (3.8%) and 11/4161 patients with polyps <2.0 cm (0.3%). There was a median interval of 3 days (range 0-9 days) from polypectomy to hemorrhage. Twenty-five patients were readmitted to this institution. Ten (40.0%) were transfused and 19 (76.0%) were re-colonoscoped, with 13 needing either cautery (n = 7) or adrenaline injection (n = 6). Ninety patients were selected as controls, matched for polyp size, location, and shape. Mean age at polypectomy was 69.9 ± 9.2 years for patients and 64.9 ± 12.2 for controls (p = 0.042); 63.3% subjects were male, compared to 47.8% of controls (p = 0.140). Univariate analysis showed that older age, piecemeal polypectomy, need for additional sedation, concurrent diverticulosis and intraprocedural bleeding were significantly associated with increased risk of delayed bleeding. The associations between delayed bleeding and additional sedation, concurrent diverticulosis and intraprocedural bleeding were confirmed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Difficult colonoscopy and intraprocedural bleeding identify patients with a particularly high risk of secondary postpolypectomy bleeding. Preventive measures should be considered in such cases.

[Colonoscopy quality control as a requirement of colorectal cancer screening]

The strategies used in population-based colorectal screening strategies culminate in colonoscopy and consequently the success of these programs largely depends on the quality of this diagnostic test. The main factors to consider when evaluating quality are scientific-technical quality, safety, patient satisfaction, and accessibility. Quality indicators allow variability among hospitals, endoscopy units and endoscopists to be determined and can identify those not achieving recommended standards. In Spain, the working group for colonoscopy quality of the Spanish Society of Gastroenterology and the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy have recently drawn up a Clinical Practice Guideline that contains the available evidence on the quality of screening colonoscopy, as well as the basic requirements that must be met by endoscopy units and endoscopists carrying out this procedure. The implementation of training programs and screening colonoscopy quality controls are strongly recommended to guarantee the success of population-based colorectal cancer screening.

Prophylactic clip application before endoscopic resection of large pedunculated colorectal polyps in patients receiving anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety of prophylactic endoclipping before resection of large pedunculated colorectal polyps in patients with uninterrupted anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a single tertiary referral center, patients with normal coagulation parameters and those with uninterrupted anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications, who underwent prophylactic endoclipping before resection of large pedunculated colorectal polyps (polyp's head diameter >10 mm), were evaluated retrospectively. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory parameters, polyp characteristics, number of clips used for endoclipping, histology of resected polyps, the polypectomy technique, and postpolypectomy complications were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

In 64 patients with large pedunculated colorectal polyps, successful endoclipping before resection was achieved. Eleven patients (17.2%) had uninterrupted anticoagulation (n = 4) or antiplatelet (n = 7) medications. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences in age, sex, indications for colonoscopy, location of polyps, size of polyp head or stalk, coexisting small polyps, histology of resected polyps, and polypectomy techniques among patients with normal coagulation parameters (group A) and patients on uninterrupted anticoagulant or antiplatelet treatment (group B). Coronary artery disease, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation were significantly more prevalent in group B. No immediate or delayed postpolypectomy hemorrhage occurred in either group. One patient (1.9%) in group A developed postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome and was successfully treated conservatively. Follow-up evaluation demonstrated no recurrence of polyps or cancer development.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our experience, uncomplicated polypectomy of large pedunculated colorectal polyps can be performed by prophylactic endoclipping in patients receiving anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications.

Risk factors for delayed post-polypectomy hemorrhage: a case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Delayed post-polypectomy hemorrhage is a rare but serious complication. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of delayed post-polypectomy hemorrhage.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study of patients who developed delayed hematochezia after receiving colonoscopic polypectomy. The control patients underwent uneventful polypectomy and were selected at a 4:1 ratio.

RESULTS

Of the 7447 lesions examined from the 3253 patients who received colonoscopic polypectomy, 53 lesions (0.7%) of 42 patients (1.3%) developed delayed hemorrhage, and 168 patients were selected as controls. According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, a polyp larger than 10 mm (odds ratio [OR] 2.355, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.225-4.528, P = 0.010), a pedunculated polyp (OR 3.473, 95% CI 1.576-7.657, P = 0.002), and a polyp located in the right hemi-colon (OR 2.690, 95% CI 1.465-4.940, P = 0.001) were significant risk factors for delayed post-polypectomy hemorrhage. The presence of comorbidities did not increase the risk of delayed hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Polyp size (large), shape (pedunculated), and location (right hemi-colon) represented substantial risk factors for the development of delayed hemorrhage after colonoscopic polypectomy.

Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Many, if not most, cases arise from premalignant lesions (adenomas) which may be identified and removed prior to becoming frankly malignant. For over a decade, colonoscopy has been the preferred modality for both CRC screening and prevention in the US. Early reports suggested that colonoscopic screening imparted a 90% risk reduction for colorectal cancer. Subsequent studies showed that estimate to be overly optimistic. While still an outstanding CRC screening and detection tool, colonoscopy has several important limitations. Some of these limitations relate to the mechanics of the procedure such as the risk of colonic perforation, bleeding, adverse consequences of sedation, and the inability to detect all colonic polyps. Other limitations reflect issues with patient perception regarding colonoscopy which, at least in part, drive patient non-adherence to recommended testing. This review examines the literature to address several important issues. First, we analyze the effect of colonoscopy on CRC incidence and mortality. Second, we consider the patient-based, periprocedural, and intraprocedural factors which may limit colonoscopy as a screening modality. Third, we explore new techniques and technologies which may enhance the efficacy of colonoscopy for adenoma detection. Finally, we discuss the short and long-term future of colonoscopy for CRC screening and the factors which may affect this future.