A prospective randomized comparative study of cold forceps polypectomy by using narrow-band imaging endoscopy versus cold snare polypectomy in patients with diminutive colorectal polyps

Advances in Endoscopic Resection

This article provides an overview of recent advances in endoscopic resection techniques. It includes the brief overview of endoscopic submucosal dissection, regional differences in ESD indications, innovation of ESD techniques, and expansion to full-thickness resection. The article covers cold snare polypectomy for small polyps with tips, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (U-EMR) for sessile lesions with tips and expanding role of U-EMR, and the key assistive techniques for ESD that have improved the safety and efficacy. Furthermore, it discusses the emerging field of endoscopic full-thickness resection including device-assisted and freehand exposure techniques.

Cold snare polypectomy compared to cold forceps polypectomy for endoscopic resection of guideline defined diminutive polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for polyps  < 10 mm in size. However, recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) showed conflicting results for the use of cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) vs. CSP for the resection of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs) (≤ 5 mm), especially for polyps  ≤ 3 mm. Herein we compared CFP with CSP for patients with DCPs in this meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception to November 24, 2022, (Registration number INPLASY2022110135). The primary endpoint was DCP complete resection rate. The secondary endpoints were mean polypectomy time, polyp retrieval rate and complications.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs involving 1023 DCPs were included. The complete resection rate (91.6% vs. 94.7%) for CFP was not significantly lower for polyps ≤ 5 mm (relative risk [RR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.07). Sub-group analysis showed that the complete resection rate (88.7% vs. 92.4%) for CFP was not significantly lower for DCPs > 3 mm (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.97-1.12). Another sub-group analysis showed that the complete resection rate (97.0% vs. 96.3%) was similar for polyps ≤ 3 mm for CFP vs. CSP (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.98-1.03). The mean polypectomy time was not different between CFP and CSP (95% CI: -11.86-10.18). The polyp retrieval rate (100% vs. 96.9%) was not significantly higher for CFP (RR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.98-1.07). There were no reported complications in the included studies. The overall study quality was moderate except for the removal of polyps ≤ 5 mm (low-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

CFP was comparable to CSP for the resection of polyps ≤ 3 mm; however, caution should be taken for DCPs > 3 mm because of the low complete resection rate (< 90%).

Cold polypectomy techniques for small and diminutive colorectal polyps: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

In the management of small and diminutive polyps, cold polypectomy is favored over electrocautery polypectomy. However, the optimal cold polypectomy technique is still controversial. Hence, this review aims to investigate the most effective cold technique for small and diminutive colorectal polyps.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through 10 February 2023. R software, (R version 4.2.0) and meta-insight software were used to pool dichotomous outcomes using risk ratio (RR) presented with the corresponding confidence interval (CI). Our protocol was prospectively published in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022345619.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs with 3649 patients and 4800 polyps were included in our analysis. Cold techniques (cold forceps polypectomy (CFP), jumbo forceps polypectomy (JFP), dedicated cold snare polypectomy (D-CSP), conventional cold snare polypectomy (C-CSP), underwater cold snare polypectomy (U-CSP), and cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) were included in our comparative analysis. CFP was less effective in achieving complete histological resection than C-CSP (RR: 1.10 with 95% CI [1.03-1.18]), CS-EMR (RR: 1.12 with 95% CI [1.02-1.23]), D-CSP (RR: 1.17 with 95% CI [1.04-1.32]), and U-CSP (RR: 1.21 with 95% CI [1.07-1.38]). However, the rest of the comparisons showed no difference.

CONCLUSION

CFP is the least effective method for small and diminutive polyps' removal, and any snare polypectomy technique will achieve better results, warranting more large-scale RCTs to investigate the most effective snare polypectomy technique.

Cold snare versus cold forceps polypectomy for endoscopic resection of diminutive polyps: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The practices for resection of diminutive colon polyps vary among endoscopists, and U.S. Multi-Society Task force guidelines recommend use of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for this purpose. In this meta-analysis, we compared CSP and cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) for resection of diminutive polyps.

METHODS

Several databases were reviewed to identify randomized controlled trials that compared CSP and CFP for resection of diminutive polyps. The study outcomes of interest were complete resection of all diminutive polyps, complete resection of polyps ≤3 mm in size, failure of tissue retrieval, and polypectomy time. For categorical variables, pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated; for continuous variables, mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs were calculated. Data were analyzed by using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed by using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

We included 9 studies with 1037 patients. Rate of complete resection of all diminutive polyps was significantly higher in the CSP group (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.09-2.58). Subgroup analysis, including jumbo or large-capacity forceps, found no significant difference in complete resection between groups (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, .80-2.56). We found no significant between-groups in the rates of complete resection of polyps ≤3 mm in size (OR, .83; 95% CI, .30-2.31). Rate of failure of tissue retrieval was significantly higher in the CSP group (OR, 10.13; 95% CI, 2.29-44.74). No significant between-group difference was noted in polypectomy time.

CONCLUSIONS

CFP using large-capacity or jumbo biopsy forceps is noninferior to CSP for complete resection of diminutive polyps.

Cold resection for colorectal polyps: where we are and where we are going?

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic resection of colonic precancerous lesions has been demonstrated to significantly decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Among resection techniques, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been shown as a highly feasible, effective and safe option and is widely used in clinical practice, being regarded as the first-line technique for removal of small and diminutive colorectal polyps. On the other hand, conventional hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), namely the gold standard treatments for larger polyps, may be occasionally associated to complications due to electrocautery injury.

AREAS COVERED

To overcome these shortcomings of electrocautery-based resection techniques, in the last few years CSP has been increasingly assessed as a treatment option for additional indications, with a focus on nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥10 mm.

EXPERT OPINION

This review aims to present current and widened indications of CSP discussing the latest findings from the most remarkable studies, with an insight into technical issues, novelties and potential advances in the near future.

Colorectal cold snare polypectomy: Current standard technique and future perspectives

It has been shown that resection of adenomatous colorectal polyps can reduce mortality due to colorectal cancer. In daily clinical practice, simpler and safer methods of colorectal polypectomy have been sought to enable endoscopists to resect all detected lesions. Among these, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely used in clinical practice because of its advantages in shortening procedure time, reducing delayed bleeding risk, and lowering treatment costs, while maintaining a similar complete resection rate for lesions smaller than 10 mm when compared to conventional hot snare polypectomy. This review introduces the findings of previous studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of the CSP procedure for nonpedunculated polyps smaller than 10 mm, and describes technical points to remember when practicing CSP based on the latest evidence, including using a thin wire snare specifically designed for CSP, and observing the surrounding mucosa of the resection site with chromoendoscopy or image-enhanced endoscopy to ensure that there is no residual lesion. This review also describes the potential of expanding the indication of CSP as a treatment for lesions larger than 10 mm, those with pedunculated morphology, those located near the appendiceal orifice, and for patients under continuous antithrombotic agent therapy. Finally, the perspective on optimal treatments for recurrent lesions after CSP is also discussed, despite the limited related evidence and data.

Cold Versus Hot Snare Polypectomy for Small Colorectal Polyps : A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Although cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is considered effective in reducing delayed postpolypectomy bleeding risk, direct evidence supporting its safety in the general population remains lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify whether CSP would reduce delayed bleeding risk after polypectomy compared with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) in the general population.

DESIGN

Multicenter randomized controlled study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03373136).

SETTING

6 sites in Taiwan, July 2018 through July 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants aged 40 years or older with polyps of 4 to 10 mm.

INTERVENTION

CSP or HSP to remove polyps of 4 to 10 mm.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the delayed bleeding rate within 14 days after polypectomy. Severe bleeding was defined as a decrease in hemoglobin concentration of 20 g/L or more, requiring transfusion or hemostasis. Secondary outcomes included mean polypectomy time, successful tissue retrieval, en bloc resection, complete histologic resection, and emergency service visits.

RESULTS

A total of 4270 participants were randomly assigned (2137 to CSP and 2133 to HSP). Eight patients (0.4%) in the CSP group and 31 (1.5%) in the HSP group had delayed bleeding (risk difference, -1.1% [95% CI, -1.7% to -0.5%]). Severe delayed bleeding was also lower in the CSP group (1 [0.05%] vs. 8 [0.4%] events; risk difference, -0.3% [CI, -0.6% to -0.05%]). Mean polypectomy time (119.0 vs. 162.9 seconds; difference in mean, -44.0 seconds [CI, -53.1 to -34.9 seconds]) was shorter in the CSP group, although successful tissue retrieval, en bloc resection, and complete histologic resection did not differ. The CSP group had fewer emergency service visits than the HSP group (4 [0.2%] vs. 13 [0.6%] visits; risk difference, -0.4% [CI, -0.8% to -0.04%]).

LIMITATION

An open-label, single-blind trial.

CONCLUSION

Compared with HSP, CSP for small colorectal polyps significantly reduces the risk for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding, including severe events.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Boston Scientific Corporation.

[Current endoscopic resection techniques in the colorectum: possibilities, perspectives, limitations]

Since the first endoscopic polypectomies have been performed, the resection of premalignant lesions during colonoscopy has become a success story in the field of gastroenterology: Incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer have been significantly reduced with the implementation of screening programs. Most polyps in the lower gastrointestinal tract are small and easy to remove. However, larger polyps, early carcinomas and subepithelial lesions can be removed with modern endoscopic resection techniques as well. Minimally invasive endoscopic resections offer an organ-preserving alternative to surgery in a growing number of patients. In this review, we discuss the advantages and limitations of traditional and novel endoscopic resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic full thickness resection.

Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Cold Snare and Forceps Polypectomy Among Small POLYPs in Rates of Complete Resection: The TINYPOLYP Trial

INTRODUCTION

Optimizing complete resection during colonoscopy is important because residual neoplastic tissue may play a role in interval cancers. The US Multi-Society Task Force recommends diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) polyps be removed by cold snare polypectomy (CSP). However, evidence is less clear whether CSP retains significant advantage over cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) for polyps ≤3 mm.

METHODS

This study is a single-center prospective noninferiority randomized clinical trial evaluating CFP and CSP for nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. Patients 18 years and older undergoing colonoscopy for any indication were recruited. During each colonoscopy, polyps underwent block randomization to removal with CFP or CSP. After polypectomy, 2 biopsies were taken from the polypectomy margin. The primary noninferiority outcome was the complete resection rate, defined by absence of residual polyp in the margin biopsies.

RESULTS

A total of 179 patients were included. Patients had similar distribution in age, sex, race/ethnicity, as well as indication of procedure. A total of 279 polyps ≤3 mm were identified, with 138 in the CSP group and 141 in the CFP group. Mean polypectomy time was longer for CSP compared with CFP (42.3 vs 23.2 seconds, P &lt; 0.001), although a higher proportion of polyps removed by CFP were removed in more than 1 piece compared with CSP (15.6 vs 3.6%, P &lt; 0.001). There were positive margin biopsies in 2 cases per cohort, with a complete resection rate of 98.3% in both groups. There was no significant difference in cohorts in complete resection rates (difference in complete resection rates was 0.057%, 95% confidence interval: -4.30% to 4.53%), demonstrating noninferiority of CFP compared with CSP.

DISCUSSION

Use of CFP was noninferior to CSP in the complete resection of nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. CSP required significantly more time to perform compared with CFP. CFP should be considered an acceptable alternative to CSP for removal of polyps ≤3 mm.

Cold versus hot snare resection with or without submucosal injection of 6- to 15-mm colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cold snare resection of colorectal lesions has been found to be safe and effective for an expanding set of colorectal lesions. In this study, we sought to understand the efficacy of simple cold snare resection and cold EMR versus hot snare resection and hot EMR for colorectal lesions 6 to 15 mm in size.

METHODS

At 3 U.S. centers, 235 patients with 286 colorectal lesions 6 to 15 mm in size were randomized to cold snaring, cold EMR, hot snaring, or hot EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 6 to 15 mm in size. The primary outcome was complete resection determined by 4 biopsy samples from the defect margin and 1 biopsy sample from the center of the resection defect.

RESULTS

The overall incomplete resection rate was 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], .8%-7.5%). All 7 incompletely removed polyps were 10 to 15 mm in size and removed by hot EMR (n = 4, 6.2%), hot snare (n = 2, 2.2%), or cold EMR (n = 1, 1.8%). Cold snaring had no incomplete resections, required less procedural time than the other methods, and was not associated with serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Cold snaring is a dominant resection technique for nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 6 to 15 mm in size. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03462706.).

Prevalence of Forceps Polypectomy of Nondiminutive Polyps Is Substantial But Modifiable

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The use of forceps for removal of nondiminutive polyps is associated with incomplete resection compared with snare polypectomy. However, few studies have characterized the frequency of forceps polypectomy for nondiminutive polyps or identified strategies to improve this practice. To address this gap, we estimated the prevalence and predictors of forceps polypectomy in clinical practice and examined the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to reduce inappropriate forceps polypectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all colonoscopies with polypectomies performed at 2 U.S. health systems between October 1, 2017, and September 30, 2019. We used a mixed-effects logistic regression model to examine the effect of a multicomponent intervention, including provider education and a financial incentive, to reduce inappropriate forceps polypectomy, defined as use of forceps polypectomy for polyps ≥5 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 9968 colonoscopies with 25,534 polypectomies were performed by 42 gastroenterologists during the study period. Overall, 8.5% (n = 2176) of polyps were removed with inappropriate forceps polypectomy. Inappropriate forceps polypectomy significantly decreased after the intervention (odds ratio [OR], 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.39), from 11.4% (n = 1539) to 5.3% (n = 637). Predictors of inappropriate forceps polypectomy included inadequate bowel prep (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.47), polyps in the right colon (vs left: OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.09-1.51), and number of polyps removed (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97). Inappropriate forceps polypectomy also varied by gastroenterologist (median OR, 3.43). In a post hoc analysis, the proportion of polyps >2 mm removed with forceps decreased from 50.0% before the intervention to 43.0% after it (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

Inappropriate forceps polypectomy is common but modifiable. The proportion of nondiminutive polyps removed with forceps polypectomy should be considered as a quality measure.

A Pilot Randomized Trial of Polypectomy Techniques for 4 to 6 mm Colonic Polyps

BACKGROUND AND GOALS

There is variation in polypectomy techniques for resection of small polyps. Aim was to compare techniques for 4 to 6 mm polyps for recurrent adenoma, efficiency, and adverse events and to establish methodological factors for definitive trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was a randomized controlled trial. Outpatients with ≥1, 4 to 6 mm polyps were randomized to cold forceps (CF), cold snare (CS), and hot snare (HS). Polypectomy site was marked with SPOT to assess for recurrence at the original polypectomy site during surveillance colonoscopy. To assess feasibility of a definitive trial we measured (1) rates of patient refusal, participation, ineligibility; (2) retention; (3) recurrent neoplasia; and (4) sample size for a definitive trial.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-three patients were randomized to 1 of the 3 polypectomy techniques, of whom 260 (73.6%) completed the initial colonoscopy (mean age 57 y, 50.4% women), with 91, 87, and 82 patients randomized to CF, CS, and HS polypectomy, respectively. Mean time for polyp resection for CF, CS, and HS were 198.8, 58.5, and 96.8 seconds, respectively, with CS and HS requiring less time than CF (P<0.001). One hundred sixty-four (63.1%) completed surveillance colonoscopy. Polyp recurrences were 9 (14.5%) with CF, 5 (9.6%) with CS, and 0 (0%) with HS. Although the recurrence relative risks with CF and CS polypectomy were 1.84 and 1.65 as compared with HS, respectively, neither was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

CS and HS polypectomy require less time than CF. HS polypectomy may have a lower risk for recurrent neoplasia. High attrition rate is a challenge in conducting randomized controlled trial with polyp recurrence as endpoint.

Comparison of postpolypectomy bleeding events between cold snare polypectomy and hot snare polypectomy for small colorectal lesions: a large-scale propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP), a safe procedure for removing colon polyps, has a low prevalence of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). Previous studies have failed to demonstrate differences in PPB rates between CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP), possibly because of their small sample sizes. This study analyzed PPB rates after CSP and HSP.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of colorectal lesions (diameter <10 mm) treated using endoscopic resection at our institution between January 2015 and December 2019. Resections were performed using CSP or HSP, depending on the endoscopist's preference. Endoscopic and histologic findings were recorded in the endoscopic database at our institution. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to match patient age, lesion size, macroscopic features, location of the lesions, clipping after resection, and antithrombotic agent use. The CSP and HSP groups were compared to determine the adverse event (PPB) rates.

RESULTS

The CSP and HSP groups included 12,928 and 2408 lesions (total of 5371 patients), respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that the overall prevalence of PPB after HSP was higher than that after CSP (odds ratio [OR], 5.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.50-11.60). After PS matching (2135 lesions per group), the prevalence of PPB after HSP remained higher than that after CSP (OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.34-26.8).

CONCLUSIONS

For colorectal lesions <10 mm in diameter, the risk of PPB after CSP is significantly lower than that after HSP, after PS matching. CSP for lesions <10 mm could be safely performed compared with HSP.

Endoscopic characterization of colorectal neoplasia with different published classifications: comparative study involving CONECCT classification

Background and study aims  The aim of this study was to validate the COlorectal NEoplasia Classification to Choose the Treatment (CONECCT) classification that groups all published criteria (including covert signs of carcinoma) in a single table. Patients and methods  For this multicenter comparative study an expert endoscopist created an image library (n = 206 lesions; from hyperplastic to deep invasive cancers) with at least white light Imaging and chromoendoscopy images (virtual ± dye based). Lesions were resected/biopsied to assess histology. Participants characterized lesions using the Paris, Laterally Spreading Tumours, Kudo, Sano, NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic Classification (NICE), Workgroup serrAted polypS and Polyposis (WASP), and CONECCT classifications, and assessed the quality of images on a web-based platform. Krippendorff alpha and Cohen's Kappa were used to assess interobserver and intra-observer agreement, respectively. Answers were cross-referenced with histology. Results  Eleven experts, 19 non-experts, and 10 gastroenterology fellows participated. The CONECCT classification had a higher interobserver agreement (Krippendorff alpha = 0.738) than for all the other classifications and increased with expertise and with quality of pictures. CONECCT classification had a higher intra-observer agreement than all other existing classifications except WASP (only describing Sessile Serrated Adenoma Polyp). Specificity of CONECCT IIA (89.2, 95 % CI [80.4;94.9]) to diagnose adenomas was higher than the NICE2 category (71.1, 95 % CI [60.1;80.5]). The sensitivity of Kudo Vi, Sano IIIa, NICE 2 and CONECCT IIC to detect adenocarcinoma were statistically different ( P  < 0.001): the highest sensitivities were for NICE 2 (84.2 %) and CONECCT IIC (78.9 %), and the lowest for Kudo Vi (31.6 %). Conclusions  The CONECCT classification currently offers the best interobserver and intra-observer agreement, including between experts and non-experts. CONECCT IIA is the best classification for excluding presence of adenocarcinoma in a colorectal lesion and CONECCT IIC offers the better compromise for diagnosing superficial adenocarcinoma.

Long-term outcomes of cold snare polypectomy for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The effectiveness of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs) regarding long-term outcomes is not fully clarified. This study aimed to investigate long-term outcomes of CSP for SNADETs.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with sporadic SNADETs and treated with CSP at Chiba University Hospital between March 2015 and May 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Long-term outcomes, short-term outcomes, and adverse events were investigated.

RESULTS

In total, 35 patients with 46 lesions were included. The en-bloc resection rate was 97.8%. Thirty-seven lesions (80.4%) were diagnosed as adenomatous. The R0 resection rate for adenomatous lesions was 70.3%. Follow-up investigations more than 12 months after CSP were completed for 35 adenomatous lesions (94.6%). The median observation period after CSP was 48 months. One patient whose observation period was only 3 months died from chronic heart failure with cardiac sarcoidosis 6 months after CSP. No patient died from SNADETs. The relapse-free survival rate at 12 months after CSP was 97.1%. One recurrence (2.7%) was observed 12 months after CSP. We removed the recurrence lesion with CSP and cold forceps polypectomy. No new recurrence occurred within the observation period. No perforation or post-operative bleeding occurred for CSP.

CONCLUSIONS

Cold snare polypectomy for diminutive and small SNADETs is a safe and useful procedure with a high en-bloc resection rate and long-term local control capability.

Interobserver reliability of methods to determine complete resection of adenomas in colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Forceps margin biopsy and polypectomy specimen margins have both been used to assess for polypectomy resection adequacy. The interobserver reliability of the two methods has not been well described.

METHODS

The interpretability of polypectomy specimens for presence of residual neoplasia at the margin was assessed by two blinded pathologists. Next, the concordance of forceps margin biopsy interpretations between three blinded pathologists was evaluated by calculation of interobserver κ.

RESULTS

Rates of polypectomy specimen margin interpretability were low: 24/92 (26 %) for pathologist A, 28/92 (30.4 %) for pathologist B. Concordance of forceps margin biopsy interpretations (n = 129) between pathologists was high. Two internal pathologists showed substantial agreement in margin biopsy interpretations (κ 0.779; 95 %CL 0.543, 0.912). The concordance remained strong after biopsies were reviewed by a third, external pathologist (κ 0.829; 95 %CL 0.658, 0.924). There was complete agreement on 123/129 (95.3 %) between all three pathologists for presence of neoplasia.

CONCLUSION

The majority of polypectomy specimen margins were uninterpretable by pathologists for presence of residual neoplasia. Forceps margin biopsy shows strong interobserver reliability in adenomatous lesions.

Evaluation of complete cold forceps polypectomy resection rate for 3- to 5-mm colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The propriety of cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) using jumbo biopsy forceps for diminutive polyps remains controversial. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the complete CFP resection rate of 3-5-mm polyps using additional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) specimens following CFP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with 3-5-mm protruded or flat elevated colorectal polyps diagnosed endoscopically as adenomas or serrated lesions were prospectively enrolled. CFP using jumbo biopsy forceps was used to remove the eligible polyps and repeated until the absence of residuals were confirmed via image-enhanced endoscopy or chromoendoscopy. After CFP, saline was injected at the defect, and the marginal specimen of the defect was resected using EMR to histologically evaluate the residue. The primary outcome was the complete CFP resection rate, which was defined as no residue at the EMR site. Other outcomes were the number of CFP bites and the complete resection rate by lesion size.

RESULTS

Eighty patients with 120 polyps were enrolled. The mean polyp size was 4.1 ± 0.7 mm. The overall complete resection rate was 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7-98.7), and the rates for 3-, 4- and 5-mm polyps were 100% (95% CI, 86.7-100), 96.0% (95% CI, 86.5-98.9) and 95.5% (95% CI, 85.1-98.8), respectively. The one-bite CFP rates were 92%, 60% and 31% for the 3-, 4- and 5-mm polyps, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The complete CFP resection rate for 3-5-mm polyps was acceptable, although the one-bite clearance rate decreased as the polyp size increased (UMIN000028841).

First experience in clinical application of hyperspectral endoscopy for evaluation of colonic polyps

Early detection and resection of adenomatous polyps prevents their progression to colorectal cancer (CRC), significantly improving patient outcomes. Polyps are typically identified and removed during white-light colonoscopy. Unfortunately, the rate of interval cancers that arise between CRC screening events remains high, linked to poor visualization of polyps during screening and incomplete polyp removal. Here, we sought to evaluate the potential of a hyperspectral endoscope (HySE) to enhance polyp discrimination for detection and resection. We designed, built and tested a new compact HySE in a proof-of-concept clinical study. We successfully collected spectra from three tissue types in seven patients undergoing routine colonoscopy screening. The acquired spectral data from normal tissue and polyps, both pre- and post- resection, were subjected to quantitative analysis using spectral angle mapping and machine learning, which discriminated the data by tissue type, meriting further investigation of HySE as a clinical tool.

Colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines

The Colonoscopy Screening and Surveillance Guidelines were developed by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society as basic guidelines based on the scientific methods. The importance of endoscopic screening and surveillance for both detection and post-treatment follow-up of colorectal cancer has been recognized as essential to reduce disease mortality. There is limited high-level evidence in this field; therefore, we had to focus on the consensus of experts. These clinical practice guidelines consist of 20 clinical questions and eight background knowledge topics that have been determined as the current guiding principles.

Medical needs related to the endoscopic technology and colonoscopy for colorectal cancer diagnosis

Background

The high incidence and mortality rate of colorectal cancer require new technologies to improve its early diagnosis. This study aims at extracting the medical needs related to the endoscopic technology and the colonoscopy procedure currently used for colorectal cancer diagnosis, essential for designing these demanded technologies.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews and an online survey were used.

Results

Six endoscopists were interviewed and 103 were surveyed, obtaining the demanded needs that can be divided into: a) clinical needs, for better polyp detection and classification (especially flat polyps), location, size, margins and penetration depth; b) computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system needs, for additional visual information supporting polyp characterization and diagnosis; and c) operational/physical needs, related to limitations of image quality, colon lighting, flexibility of the endoscope tip, and even poor bowel preparation.

Conclusions

This study shows some undertaken initiatives to meet the detected medical needs and challenges to be solved. The great potential of advanced optical technologies suggests their use for a better polyp detection and classification since they provide additional functional and structural information than the currently used image enhancement technologies. The inspection of remaining tissue of diminutive polyps (< 5 mm) should be addressed to reduce recurrence rates. Few progresses have been made in estimating the infiltration depth. Detection and classification methods should be combined into one CAD system, providing visual aids over polyps for detection and displaying a Kudo-based diagnosis suggestion to assist the endoscopist on real-time decision making. Estimated size and location of polyps should also be provided. Endoscopes with 360° vision are still a challenge not met by the mechanical and optical systems developed to improve the colon inspection. Patients and healthcare providers should be trained to improve the patient’s bowel preparation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08190-z.

Endoscopic resection of local recurrences of diminutive polyps by cold forceps polypectomy

OBJECTIVES

Cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) is an effective treatment for diminutive colorectal polyps. However, polyps occasionally recur, and there is no consensus on their long-term clinical management. Therefore, we investigated the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of re-CFP for recurrent diminutive colorectal polyps.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a follow-up of a multicenter, prospective study investigating the clinical outcomes of diminutive colorectal polyps excised by CFP with narrowband imaging-enhanced endoscopy and jumbo forceps. We evaluated short-term outcomes of re-CFP and patients at 1-year follow-up post re-CFP for recurrent colorectal polyps to determine long-term recurrence rates. Additionally, complete resection rates, clinicopathological features, number of forceps bites, and rate of short-term adverse events managed by re-CFP were evaluated.

RESULTS

At 1-year follow-up, local recurrence was identified in 18 patients from the original study. The mean size of local recurrent polyps was 1.5 ± 0.6 mm, and all recurrent lesions were < 3 mm. Re-CFP could successfully excise locally recurrent polyps in all cases. All recurrent lesions were low-grade adenomas; no adverse events were reported. Additionally, 16 of 18 patients were evaluated endoscopically at 2-year follow-up; no recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent lesions following initial CFP were small and pathologically benign, and re-CFP was an effective treatment.

Personalizing Polypectomy Techniques Based on Polyp Characteristics

Polypectomy is an essential skill for all endoscopists performing lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. Different polypectomy tools and techniques have evolved and it is important that endoscopists are familiar with these so they can select the most appropriate technique for each polyp. This narrative review updates the different concepts in tailoring polypectomy technique to the characteristics of polyps. Effective polypectomy requires different components, including the following: careful evaluation of the polyp; decision making about optimal polyp management; actual polypectomy, which includes careful positioning of the endoscope and polyp; and postpolypectomy evaluation of the results (for completeness of resection and prophylaxis of complications).

Usefulness of narrow-band imaging for the detection of remnant sessile-serrated adenoma (SSA) tissue after endoscopic resection: the KASID multicenter study

BACKGROUND

A sessile-serrated adenoma (SSA) has a high risk for incomplete resection. Little is known regarding how to immediately detect remnant SSA tissue after endoscopic resection. We investigated the usefulness of narrow-band imaging (NBI) to detect remnant SSA tissue after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized study on 138 patients who had suspicious SSA on colonoscopy at five centers. After EMR on the suspected SSA determined on the endoscopic morphology, all lesions were randomized into two inspection methods, NBI and white light endoscopy (WLE), to detect remnant tissue on the resected margin. If remnant tissue was detected, an additional resection was performed. Finally, we obtained quadrant biopsies on the resection margin to evaluate the incomplete resection. The proportion of incomplete resection was calculated by combining the detection of remnant tissue and the positivity of SSA cells on the final quadrant biopsies. The primary outcome was the proportion of remnant tissue detection, and the secondary outcome was the proportion of incomplete resection of SSA.

RESULTS

In all, 145 lesions from 138 patients were removed. The diagnostic rate of SSA was 87.6% (127/145). After randomization, NBI inspection was performed on 69 lesions, and WLE inspection was performed on 76 lesions. The histologic diagnostic rate of SSA was 89.9% (62/69) in the NBI group and 85.5% (65/76) in the WLE group (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the detection of remnant tissue (12.9% (8/62) vs. 15.4% (10/65), p > 0.05), the proportion of SSA in remnant tissue (11.3% (7/62) vs. 12.3% (8/65), p > 0.05), or the proportion of incomplete resection (6.5 (4/62) vs. 10.8 (7/65), p > 0.05) between the NBI and WLE inspection groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

NBI was not superior to WLE for detecting remnant SSA tissue after EMR and could not decrease the proportion of incomplete resection of SSA.

Rates of Incomplete Resection of 1- to 20-mm Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Incomplete resection of neoplastic colorectal polyps can result in postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incomplete resection rate (IRR) of colorectal polyps and associated factors.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, and CINAHL to identify full-text articles that reported IRRs of polyps 1 to 20 mm, published until March 2019. Exclusion criteria were studies of inflammatory bowel disease cohorts, referrals for difficult polypectomy, polyp sizes larger than 20 mm, and endoscopic submucosal resection and/or dissection as polypectomy approaches. IRRs were calculated based on findings from biopsies taken at polypectomy sites or assessments of margins of resected polyps. The primary outcome was IRR for snare removal of polyps 1 to 20 mm. Secondary outcomes included IRR for polyps 1 to 10 mm and 10 to 20 mm, IRR for hot and cold snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm and 10 to 20 mm, IRR of snare removal with or without submucosal injection, and IRR for forceps and cold snare removal of polyps 1 to 5 mm.

RESULTS

We identified 6148 reports and used 32 studies, with a total of 9282 polyps, in our quantitative analysis. The IRR for snare removal of polyps 1 to 20 mm was 13.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.3-17.3; 13 studies, 5128 polypectomies). IRRs were 15.9% for snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm (95% CI 9.6-22.1; 9 studies, 2531 polypectomies) and 20.8% for snare removal of polyps 10 to 20 mm (95% CI 12.9-28.8; 6 studies, 412 polypectomies). The IRR for hot snare removal of polyps 1 to 10 mm was 14.2% (95% CI 5.2-23.2) vs 17.3% for cold snare polypectomy (95% CI 14.3‒20.3). The IRR for forceps removal of polyps 1 to 5 mm was 9.9% (95% CI 7.1-13.0) vs 4.4% for snare polypectomy (95% CI 2.9-6.1).

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that colorectal polyps 1 to 20 mm are frequently incompletely resected, and that risk increases for polyps 10 mm or larger. There is no difference in IRRs of cold vs hot snares for polyps 1 to 10 mm. Snare polypectomy should be used over forceps for polyps 1 to 5 mm.

Indications for Cold Polypectomy Stratified by the Colorectal Polyp Size: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives:

Cold polypectomy (CP) is widely used because of its safety profile. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to clarify the indications for CP based on polyp size.

Methods:

We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials that compared cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and other procedures for polyps ≤10 mm. Large-scale prospective observational studies were also searched to assess delayed bleeding rates. The studies were integrated to assess the risk ratio for incomplete resection rates according to polyp size. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the study bias. The certainty of cumulative evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

Results:

We found 280 articles and reviewed their eligibility. We selected and extracted 12 randomized controlled trials and 3 prospective observational studies. The risk ratio of incomplete resection of polyps ≤10 mm using CSP compared with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) was 1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-2.01). The risk ratio for incomplete removal using CSP compared with cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.31-0.82). For polyps ≤3 mm, the risk ratio of CSP compared with CFP was 1.40 (95% CI, 0.39-4.95). Certainty of cumulative evidence was considered low. No delayed bleeding after CP was reported after the treatment of 3446 polyps.

Conclusions:

CSP and HSP may result in the same complete resection rates for polyps ≤10 mm. For polyps ≤3 mm, CFP and CSP may have the same resection rates (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019122132).

The Cold Revolution: How Far Can It Go?

Cold resection for small colonic polyps, and larger lesions, is being rapidly and widely adopted. Driven by an impressive safety and cost profile compared with conventional polypectomy, these advantages are offset by the limitations of smaller and shallower resection, and absent thermal effects that may permit persistence of residual neoplasia. To overcome this, optimal cold snare technique requires inclusion of a margin of normal mucosa and a piecemeal resection technique for larger polyps. This article examines the fundamentals of cold snare resection and evidence for its application, theorizes on limits to its application, and identifies areas for further research.

Best Practices for Resection of Diminutive and Small Polyps in the Colorectum

Diminutive colorectal lesions are polyps and flat lesions 1 to 5 mm in size, and small are 6 to 9 mm in size. The best resection method is the cold snare. Cold forceps are acceptable for 1- to 3-mm lesions, but should not be used to piecemeal polyps. Cold snaring has few complications and is more effective than cold forceps for 4- to 5-mm polyps and as effective and more efficient than hot snaring for 6- to 9-mm polyps.

Jumbo biopsy forceps versus cold snares for removing diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and jumbo forceps polypectomy (JFP) have been shown to be effective for removing diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs) (≤5 mm). However, no study has compared complete resection rates between CSP and JFP for DCPs. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of JFP with CSP for the removal of DCPs.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized controlled trial from 2 tertiary-care referral centers. A total of 1003 patients were screened, and 169 patients with 196 DCPs were enrolled. The main outcome was complete polyp resection rate.

RESULTS

Of 196 diminutive polyps, 177 (90.3%) were adenomatous polyps. The overall complete resection rate was 92.1% (163/177). The complete resection rate was not significantly different between JFP and CSP groups (92.0% vs 92.2%; P = .947). JFP achieved complete resection rates comparable with CSP for polyps >3 mm (90.3% vs 89.8%; P = .928). Polypectomy procedure time, tissue retrieval rate, and rate of postpolypectomy adverse events were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both JFP and CSP achieved complete resection rates of >90% for DCPs. Thus, JFP may be considered for polypectomy of DCPs. (International clinical trial registry number: KCT0002805.).

Adherence to European Polypectomy Guidelines: Retrospective Experience from a Tertiary Irish Hospital

Background and Study Aim

The European guidelines for colorectal cancer screening state that snare resection should remove any polyps ≥5 mm. This study aimed to investigate if these new guidelines are adhered to in clinical practice.

Patients and Methods

This study consists of patients who underwent colonoscopies in Tallaght Hospital, Dublin (AMNCH), between 2012 and 2015. The size of the polyp, the method of removal, and the subspecialty and grade of the endoscopists were all recorded.

Results

6,000 colonoscopies were reviewed and 687 (12.5%) of these patients were found to have polyps. In 655 (95%) colonoscopies, the caecum was positively identified. In all, 371 (54%) of the polyps detected were < 5 mm; resection via forceps was carried out in n405 cases (59%). Overall, 16% (n = 45) of the polyps > 5 mm underwent resection with forceps, showing that the new European guidelines are not being tightly adhered to.

Conclusions

This study found an 84% compliance with polypectomy resection guidelines which is an improvement on previous studies. However, endoscopist grade significantly affected compliance and may reflect overall competency, highlighting the need for specific training in snare polypectomy techniques.

BEST POLYPECTOMY TECHNIQUE FOR SMALL AND DIMINUTIVE COLORECTAL POLYPS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Polypectomy of colorectal polyps is the mainstay of colorectal cancer prevention. Identification of the best polypectomy technique is imperative.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims at comparing efficacy of nine different resection methods for small colorectal polyps (<10 mm).

METHODS

We searched and selected only randomized controlled trials. Primary outcome was complete resection rates of small polyps by histological eradication. Secondary outcomes were: adverse events, retrieval tissue failures rates and duration of procedure.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials including 3215 patients and 5223 polyps were analysed. Overall, cold polypectomy had a significantly shorter time of procedure than hot polypectomy (RD -5.92, 95%CI -9.90 to -1.94, P<0.05), with no statistical difference on complete histological eradication (RD 0.08, 95%CI -0.03 to 0.19, P>0.05). Regarding cold polypectomy techniques, cold snare was found superior to cold forceps on complete and en-bloc resection rates and less time consuming. When comparing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with hot-snare and cold-snare, the latter showed no-inferiority on histological eradication, adverse events or retrieval tissue failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Cold polypectomy is the best technique for resection of small colorectal polyps. Among cold methods, dedicated cold snare was found superior on histological eradication. Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection might be considered an option for polyps from 5 to 9 mm.

Risk of delayed bleeding before and after implementation of cold snare polypectomy in a screening colonoscopy setting

Background and study aims  Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is considered to be effective in reducing risk of delayed bleeding but randomized trials fail to support this owing to the small sample size. The current study aimed to compare risk of delayed bleeding before and after implementation of CSP in a screening colonoscopy setting. Patients and methods  This study retrospectively analyzed a prospectively maintained screening colonoscopy database in a university hospital in Taiwan. We compared the rate of delayed bleeding before and after implementation within similar periods (18 months and 15 months) and the respective number of polypectomies (1,304 and 1,255) performed to remove small and diminutive polyps. The main outcome measurement was delayed bleeding within the two periods. Multivariate analysis was performed to adjust for major confounders. Results  A total of 1,304 and 1,225 subjects received hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and CSP in two separate periods, respectively. Compared with the HSP, the CSP had a lower rate of delayed bleeding (0.1 % vs . 1.1 %, P  < 0.001), severe bleeding (0 % vs. 0.7 %, P  < 0.01), need for second-look colonoscopy (0 % vs. 0.8 %, P  < 0.01), and emergency service visits (0.1 % vs . 1.0 %, P  < 0.01). Total procedure time (12.60 ± 11.45 vs . 16.48 ± 14.27 min/person, P  < 0.01) and duration of hospital stay (1.18 ± 0.50 vs . 1.53 ± 5.78 hour/person, P  < 0.03) were also shorter after CSP implementation. Multivariate analysis showed that HSP was an independent risk factor for delayed bleeding after adjusting for age, gender, and number of polyps (adjusted odds ratio 14.4;95 % confidence interval = 1.88 - 110.6). Conclusion  Implementation of CSP significantly reduces risk of delayed bleeding associated with removing small and diminutive polyps in screening colonoscopy.

Complete polypectomy and early detection and management of residual disease to reduce the risk of interval colorectal cancers

Advances in colorectal polyp detection and resection methods aim to reduce interval cancer rates. Complete polypectomy is essential to reduce the risk of early recurrence and the development of interval cancers. To achieve this, polyps must first be correctly identified and then completely excised. This article reviews current adenoma detection methods in use and the management of residual disease.

Efficacy and safety of cold versus hot snare polypectomy for resecting small colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Safety and effectiveness of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) compared with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) has been reported. The aim of the present study is to carry out a meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of HSP and CSP.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were reviewed to compare HSP with CSP for resecting small colorectal polyps. Outcomes reviewed include complete resection rate, polyp retrieval, delayed bleeding, perforation and procedure time. Outcomes were documented by pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel random effect model.

RESULTS

Eight studies were reviewed in this meta-analysis, including 1665 patients with 3195 polyps. Complete resection rate using HSP was similar to CSP (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.98-1.07, P = 0.31). Polyp retrieval after HSP was similar to CSP (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 1.00-1.01, P = 0.60). Delayed bleeding rate after HSP was higher than after CSP, although not significantly (patient basis: RR: 7.53, 95% CI: 0.94-60.24, P = 0.06; polyp basis: RR: 7.35, 95% CI: 0.91-59.33, P = 0.06). Perforation was not reported in all eight studies. Total colonoscopy time for HSP was significantly longer than CSP (mean difference 7.13 min, 95% CI: 5.32-8.94, P < 0.001). Specific polypectomy time for HSP was significantly longer than CSP (mean difference 30.92 s, 95% CI: 9.15-52.68, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows significantly shorter procedure time using CSP compared with HSP. CSP tends toward less delayed bleeding compared with HSP. We recommend CSP as the standard treatment for resecting small benign colorectal polyps.

Advances in CRC Prevention: Screening and Surveillance

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most commonly diagnosed cancers and causes of death from cancer across the world. CRC can, however, be detected in asymptomatic patients at a curable stage, and several studies have shown lower mortality among patients who undergo screening compared with those who do not. Using colonoscopy in CRC screening also results in the detection of precancerous polyps that can be directly removed during the procedure, thereby reducing the incidence of cancer. In the past decade, convincing evidence has appeared that the effectiveness of colonoscopy as CRC prevention tool is associated with the quality of the procedure. This review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of recent efforts to improve colonoscopy effectiveness by enhancing detection and improving the completeness and safety of resection of colorectal lesions.

Width and depth of resection for small colorectal polyps: hot versus cold snare polypectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Curability is associated with resection width and depth in polypectomy. We evaluated the resection width and depth achieved with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for small colorectal polyps.

METHODS

In this single-center, prospective, randomized controlled study, patients with rectal or rectosigmoid polyps ≤10 mm in diameter were treated with HSP or CSP. Resection width was evaluated as mucosal defect size, measured immediately postprocedure and 1 day later. Resection depth was histologically evaluated using obtained specimens.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Mean lesion size was 5.6 mm with HSP (n = 27) and 5.8 mm with CSP (n = 25). Mean mucosal defect diameter immediately after HSP and CSP was 5.1 mm and 7.5 mm, respectively (P < .001). The diameter 1 day after the procedure increased by 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17%-41%) with HSP and decreased by 25% (95% CI, 18%-32%) with CSP (P < .001). Muscularis mucosa was obtained similarly with HSP and CSP (96% [95% CI, 82%-99%] vs 92% [95% CI, 75%-98%]; P = .603). Submucosal tissue was obtained significantly more frequently with HSP than with CSP (81% [95% CI, 63%-92%] vs 24% [95% CI, 11%-43%]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The resection width immediately after CSP was larger than that after HSP but was significantly smaller at day 1 after resection. Although the resection depth after CSP was more superficial, muscularis mucosa was obtained in most specimens. Thus, CSP has sufficient resection width and depth to enable complete polyp resection and potentially has a superior safety profile than HSP.

High complete resection rate for pre-lift and cold biopsy of diminutive colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 The majority of polyps removed at colonoscopy are diminutive (≤ 5 mm) to small (< 10 mm) and there are few guidelines for the best way for these polyps to be removed. We aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of cold biopsy forceps polypectomy with pre-lift (CBPP) for polyps ≤ 7 mm. Our aims were to assess completeness of histological resection of this technique, to identify factors contributing to this and assess secondary considerations such as timing, retrieval and complication rates.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study on consecutive patients receiving a colonoscopy at Cheltenham General Hospital, as part of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (BCSP) in England. The study included only polyps that were judged as ≤ 7 mm by the colonoscopist. A small sub-mucosal pre-lift injection was administered prior to removal of the polyp using cold biopsy forceps. One or more biopsies were taken until the polyp was confidently assessed visually as being completely removed by the colonoscopist. The entire polypectomy site was then removed en bloc by endomucosal resection (EMR) with a margin of at least 1 to 2 mm around defect. This was sent for histopathological analysis to assess completeness of resection. Polypectomy timing, tissue retrieval, number of bites required for visual resection and complications were recorded at the time of the procedure.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were recruited and consented. Of them, 42 patients had a total of 60 polyps resected. Three patients had inflammatory polyps and were excluded from the study, leaving 57/60 polyps for final analysis. Seventeen were hyperplastic and 40 adenomatous polyps. Retrieval was complete for all 57 polyps and there were no complications both during or post- polypectomy. The complete resection rate (CRR) was 86 %. The technique was more effective in smaller polyps with 91.7 % of diminutive polyps (≤ 5 mm) completely excised.

CONCLUSIONS

CBPP is a safe and highly effective technique for polyps < 5 mm with a high complete resection and retrieval rate. The time taken for the procedure is significantly greater than cold forceps alone, or cold snare as seen in other studies.