Hemoclipping for postpolypectomy and postbiopsy colonic bleeding

Updates on the Prevention and Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding in the Colon

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) remains a significant procedure-related complication, with multiple risk factors determining the risk including patient demographics, polyp characteristics, endoscopist expertise, and techniques of polypectomy. Immediate PPB is usually treated promptly, but management of delayed PPB can be challenging. Cold snare polypectomy is the optimal technique for small sessile polyps with hot snare polypectomy for pedunculated and large sessile polyps. Topical hemostatic powders and gels are being investigated for the prevention and management of PPB. Further studies are needed to compare these topical agents with conventional therapy.

Comparative study between histochemical mucus volume, histopathological findings, and endocytoscopic scores in patients with ulcerative colitis

Ulcerative colitis (UC) causes a reduction in goblet cells. However, there have been few reports on the relationship between endoscopic and pathological findings and mucus volume. In this study, we quantitatively evaluated histochemical colonic mucus volume by fixing biopsied tissue sections taken from patients with UC in Carnoy's solution and compared it with endoscopic and pathological findings to determine whether there is a correlation between them. Observational study. A single-center, university hospital in Japan. Twenty-seven patients with UC (male/female, 16/11; mean age, 48.4 years; disease median duration, 9 years) were included in the study. The colonic mucosa of the most inflamed area and the surrounding less inflamed area were evaluated separately by local MES and endocytoscopic (EC) classification. Two biopsies were taken from each area; one was fixed with formalin for histopathological evaluation, and the other was fixed with Carnoy's solution for the quantitative evaluation of mucus via histochemical Periodic Acid Schiff and Alcian Blue staining. The relative mucus volume was significantly reduced in the local MES 1-3 groups, with worsening findings in EC-A/B/C and in groups with severe mucosal inflammation, crypt abscess, and severe reduction in goblet cells. The severity of inflammatory findings in UC by EC classification correlated with the relative mucus volume suggesting functional mucosal healing. We found a correlation between the colonic mucus volume and endoscopic and histopathological findings in patients with UC, and a stepwise correlation with disease severity, particularly in EC classification.

Management of Patients With Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Updated ACG Guideline

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common reason for hospitalization in the United States and is associated with significant utilization of hospital resources, as well as considerable morbidity and mortality. These revised guidelines implement the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools, thresholds for red blood cell transfusion, reversal agents for patients on anticoagulants, diagnostic testing including colonoscopy and computed tomography angiography (CTA), endoscopic therapeutic options, and management of antithrombotic medications after hospital discharge. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools to identify patients with LGIB at low risk of a hospital-based intervention, the role for reversal agents in patients with life-threatening LGIB on vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants, the increasing role for CTA in patients with severe LGIB, and the management of patients who have a positive CTA. We recommend that most patients requiring inpatient colonoscopy undergo a nonurgent colonoscopy because performing an urgent colonoscopy within 24 hours of presentation has not been shown to improve important clinical outcomes such as rebleeding. Finally, we provide updated recommendations regarding resumption of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications after cessation of LGIB.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy

Introduction

Joint Advisory Group (JAG) certification in endoscopy is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update standards for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS).

Methods

A modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety representation from experts and trainees. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on FS training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by national stakeholders for incorporation into the JAG FS certification pathway.

Results

In total, 41 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (17), assessment of competence (7) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (A) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (B) minimum procedure count ≥175; (C) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (D) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Lower gastrointestinal Endoscopy course; (E) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedural skill (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skill (SMSA level 1); (F) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool and (G) successful performance in summative DOPS.

Conclusion

The UK standards for training and certification in FS have been updated to support training, uphold standards in FS and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in colonoscopy

Introduction

In the UK, endoscopy certification is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for colonoscopy training and certification.

Methods

Under the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety expert representation. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on colonoscopy training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholders for incorporation into the updated colonoscopy certification pathway.

Results

In total, 45 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (20), assessment of competence (8) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (1) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, unassisted caecal intubation rate >90%, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp detection rate >15%+, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate–severe discomfort); (2) minimum procedure count 280+; (3) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (4) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Colonoscopy course; (5) terminal ileal intubation rates of 60%+ in inflammatory bowel disease; (6) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedure skills (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skills (Size, Morphology, Site, Access (SMSA) level 2); (7) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool; (8) successful performance in summative DOPS.

Conclusion

The UK standards for training and certification in colonoscopy have been updated, culminating in a single-stage certification process with emphasis on polypectomy competency (SMSA Level 2+). These standards are intended to support training, improve standards of colonoscopy and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

Comparison of bleeding following gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy in patients treated with and without direct oral anticoagulants

Background and study aims  Despite the widespread use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), the association between DOAC use and complications (e. g., bleeding) following gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate complications after biopsy in patients treated with DOACs in Japan, where biopsies would be generally performed without DOAC withdrawal based on guideline recommendations. Patients and methods  Using a Japanese nationwide database, we identified patients taking DOACs who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy (n  = 2,769, DOAC group) and those not taking DOACs (n = 129,357, control group) from April 2015 to November 2020. We conducted 1:4 propensity score (PS) matching and overlap PS-weighting analyses with adjustment for background characteristics to compare occurrence of post-procedure hemorrhage and stroke within 1 week after biopsy, and thrombin use on the day of biopsy without a diagnosis of hemorrhage. Results  In total, 578 patients (0.44 %) developed post-procedure hemorrhage, and 13 patients (0.01 %) developed stroke. The DOAC group had more comorbidities than the control group. The PS matching analysis revealed no significant differences in post-procedure hemorrhage (odds ratio, 1.52 [95 % confidential interval, 0.96-2.41]) or stroke (1.00 [0.21-4.71]), whereas the DOAC group received thrombin more often than the control group (1.60 [1.30-1.95]). The results were equivalent in the overlap PS-weighting analysis. Conclusions  The PS analyses showed no significant differences in complications following gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy between DOAC users and non-users. These results suggest the safety of endoscopic biopsy without DOAC withdrawal although the need for careful hemostasis remains.

Endoscopic management of delayed bleeding after polypectomy of small colorectal polyps: two or more clips may be safe

Background

The resection of small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm) is routine for endoscopists. However, the management of one of its main complications, namely delayed (within 14 days) postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB), has not been clearly demonstrated. We aimed to assess the role of coloscopy in the management of DPPB from small colorectal polyps and identify the associated factors for initial hemostatic success.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 69 patients who developed DPPB after the removal of colorectal polyps of ≤10 mm and underwent hemostatic colonoscopy at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) between April 2013 and June 2021. Demographics, clinical variables, and colonoscopic features were collected independently. We applied univariate and multivariate analyses to assess factors associated with initial hemostatic success.

Results

General colonoscopy without oral bowel preparation was successfully performed in all the patients, with a median duration of 23.9 (12.5–37.9) minutes. Among 69 patients, 62 (89.9%) achieved hemostasis after initial hemostatic colonoscopy and 7 (10.1%) rebled 2.7 ± 1.1 days after initial colonoscopic hemostasis and had rebleeding successfully controlled by one additional colonoscopy. No colonoscopy-related adverse events occurred. Multivariate analysis showed that management with at least two clips was the only independent prognostic factor for initial hemostatic success (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.03–0.91; P = 0.04). All the patients who had at least two clips placed at the initial hemostatic colonoscopy required no further hemostatic intervention.

Conclusions

Colonoscopy is a safe, effective, and not too time-consuming approach for the management of patients with DPPB of small colorectal polyps and management with the placement of at least two hemoclips may be beneficial.

Management and Outcomes of Bleeding Within 30 Days of Colonic Polypectomy in a Large, Real-Life, Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Management of delayed (within 30 days) postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) has not been standardized. Patients often undergo colonoscopies that do not provide any benefit. We aimed to identify factors associated with therapeutic intervention and active bleeding after DPPB.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 548 patients with bleeding within 30 days after an index polypectomy (DPPB; 71.9% underwent colonoscopy, 2.6% underwent primary angiographic embolization, and 25.5% were managed without intervention) at 6 tertiary centers in Spain, from January 2010 through September 2018. We collected demographic and medical data from patients. The primary outcomes were the need for therapeutic intervention and the presence of active bleeding during colonoscopy.

RESULTS

A need for therapeutic intervention was associated independently with the use of antithrombotic agents, hemoglobin decrease greater than 2 g/dL, hemodynamic instability, and comorbidities (P < .05). The bleeding point during colonoscopy was identified in 344 patients; 74 of these patients (21.5%) had active bleeding. Active use of anticoagulants (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5), left-sided polyps (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1-3.8), prior use of electrocautery (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.1), and pedunculated polyp morphology (OR, 1.8, 95% CI, 1-3.2) significantly increased the risk of encountering active bleeding. We developed a visual nomogram to estimate the risk of active bleeding. Overall, 43% of the cohort did not require any hemostatic therapy. Rebleeding (<6%) and transfusion requirements were low in those managed without intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

In a study of patients with DPPB, we found that almost half do not warrant any therapeutic intervention. Colonoscopy often is overused for patients with DPPB. We identified independent risk factors for active bleeding that might be used to identify patients most likely to benefit from colonoscopy.

Clip placement to prevent delayed bleeding after colonic endoscopic mucosal resection (CLIPPER): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for large colorectal polyps is in most cases the preferred treatment to prevent progression to colorectal carcinoma. The most common complication after EMR is delayed bleeding, occurring in 7% overall and in approximately 10% of polyps ≥ 2 cm in the proximal colon. Previous research has suggested that prophylactic clipping of the mucosal defect after EMR may reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding in polyps with a high bleeding risk.

METHODS

The CLIPPER trial is a multicenter, parallel-group, single blinded, randomized controlled superiority study. A total of 356 patients undergoing EMR for large (≥ 2 cm) non-pedunculated polyps in the proximal colon will be included and randomized to the clip group or the control group. Prophylactic clipping will be performed in the intervention group to close the resection defect after the EMR with a distance of < 1 cm between the clips. Primary outcome is delayed bleeding within 30 days after EMR. Secondary outcomes are recurrent or residual polyps and clip artifacts during surveillance colonoscopy after 6 months, as well as cost-effectiveness of prophylactic clipping and severity of delayed bleeding.

DISCUSSION

The CLIPPER trial is a pragmatic study performed in the Netherlands and is powered to determine the real-time efficacy and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic clipping after EMR of proximal colon polyps ≥ 2 cm in the Netherlands. This study will also generate new data on the achievability of complete closure and the effects of clip placement on scar surveillance after EMR, in order to further promote the debate on the role of prophylactic clipping in everyday clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03309683 . Registered on 13 October 2017. Start recruitment: 05 March 2018. Planned completion of recruitment: 31 August 2021.

[Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Efficacy of cyanoacrylate in the prevention of delayed bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative bleeding is a common complication after endoscopic polypectomy, particularly after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated polyps, despite prophylactic clipping can reduce its occurrence. Cyanoacrylate glue has recently been proposed as a useful tool in reducing bleeding in surgery because of its adhesive and haemostatic properties. The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of endoscopic application of a modified cyanoacrylate glue in the prevention of early or delayed post EMR bleeding.

METHODS

This is a pilot study. Inclusion criteria were patients between 18 and 75 years old affected by sessile or flat colonic polyps larger than 2 cm. Patients enrolled in the study were randomized in two groups: group A (EMR) and group B (EMR with the application of 0.3 ml of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate + methacryloxysulfolane-Glubran 2®).

RESULTS

Fifteen patients in both group A and B were enrolled. There were no intraoperative complications but haemostatic clipping was necessary in 3 patients in each group because of active bleeding. Delayed (after 24 h) bleeding occurred in two patients (13.3%) in group A requiring hospital readmission and re-do endoscopy with apposition of haemostatic clips. No case of bleeding was recorded in group B (p = 0.48).

CONCLUSION

The results of this pilot study suggest a potential role of local spray application of Glubran®2 in reducing post-procedural bleeding.

The effect of prophylactic hemoclip placement and risk factors of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding in polyps sized 6 to 20 millimeters: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is a major complication of polypectomy. The effect of prophylactic hemoclipping on delayed PPB is uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic hemoclipping and identify the risk factors of delayed PPB.

Methods

Patients with polyps sized 6 to 20 mm underwent snare polypectomy from 2015 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients with prophylactic hemoclipping for delayed PPB prevention were included in the clipping group, and those without prophylactic hemoclipping were included in the non-clipping group.

The incidence of delayed PPB and time to bleeding were compared between the groups. Multivariate analysis was used to identify the risk factors of delayed PPB. Propensity score matching was used to minimize potential bias.

Results

After propensity score matching, 612 patients with 806 polyps were in the clipping group, and 576 patients with 806 polyps were in the non-clipping group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of delayed PPB and days to bleeding between two groups (0.8% vs 1.3%, p = 0.4; 3.4 ± 1.94 days vs 4.13 ± 3.39 days, p = 0.94). In the multivariate analysis, the polyp size [Odds ratio (OR):1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.01–1.16, p = 0.03), multiple polypectomies (OR: 4.64, 95% CI:1.24–17.44, p = 0.02) and a history of anticoagulant use (OR:37.52, 95% CI:6.49–216.8, p < 0.001) were associated with delayed PPB.

Conclusions

In polyps sized 6 to 20 mm, prophylactic hemoclip placement did not decrease the risk of delayed PPB. Patients without risk factors including multiple polypectomies and anticoagulant use are no need to performing prophylactic hemoclipping.

Risk of Delayed Bleeding after a Colorectal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection without Prophylactic Clipping: Single Center, Observational Study

Background/Aims

Bleeding is one of the major complications of a colorectal polypectomy. The aim of this study was to identify the risk of delayed bleeding, particularly after a colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) without prophylactic clipping.

Methods

Between April 2014 and August 2014, patients who underwent colorectal EMR (≥6 mm and <2 cm) without prophylactic clipping were included. This study evaluated the incidence of delayed bleeding and the associated factors after colorectal EMR without prophylactic clipping.

Results

A total of 717 colorectal polyps (≥6 mm and <2 cm) of 243 patients resected by colorectal EMR in the study period were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 63 years; 165 patients were men and 78 patients were women. The mean polyp size removed by colorectal EMR was 9.0 mm (range 6.0-19.0), and the number of polyps larger than 1 cm was 212 (29.6%). Delayed bleeding after colorectal EMR occurred in 12 polyps (1.7%) in eight patients (3.3%), and there were no significant risk factors affecting delayed bleeding.

Conclusions

This study identified that the incidence of delayed bleeding on colorectal polyps (≥6 mm and <2 cm) after EMR without prophylactic clipping was 3.3%, but no significant risk factors affecting delayed bleeding were found.

Biomaterials in Gastroenterology: A Critical Overview

In spite of the large diversity of diagnostic and interventional devices associated with gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures, there is little information on the impact of the biomaterials (metals, polymers) contained in these devices upon body tissues and, indirectly, upon the treatment outcomes. Other biomaterials for gastroenterology, such as adhesives and certain hemostatic agents, have been investigated to a greater extent, but the information is fragmentary. Much of this situation is due to the paucity of details disclosed by the manufacturers of the devices. Moreover, for most of the applications in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, there are no studies available on the biocompatibility of the device materials when in intimate contact with mucosae and other components of the GI tract. We have summarized the current situation with a focus on aspects of biomaterials and biocompatibility related to the device materials and other agents, with an emphasis on the GI endoscopic procedures. Procedures and devices used for the control of bleeding, for polypectomy, in bariatrics, and for stenting are discussed, particularly dwelling upon the biomaterial-related features of each application. There are indications that research is progressing steadily in this field, and the establishment of the subdiscipline of "gastroenterologic biomaterials" is not merely a remote projection. Upon the completion of this article, the gastroenterologist should be able to understand the nature of biomaterials and to achieve a suitable and beneficial perception of their significance in gastroenterology. Likewise, the biomaterialist should become aware of the specific tasks that the biomaterials must fulfil when placed within the GI tract, and regard such applications as both a challenge and an incentive for progressing the research in this field.

Efficacy of Prophylactic Hemoclips in Prevention of Delayed Post-Polypectomy Bleeding in Patients With Large Colonic Polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The efficacy of prophylactic placement of hemoclips to prevent delayed bleeding after removal of large colonic polyps has not been established. We conducted a randomized equivalence study to determine whether prophylactic placement of hemoclips affects incidence of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB).

METHODS

During elective colonoscopy performed at 4 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, 1098 patients who had polyps ≥1 cm removed were randomly assigned to groups that received prophylactic hemoclips (n = 547) or no hemoclips (n = 551), from September 2011 through September 2018. Data on PPB (rectal bleeding resulting in hemoglobin decreases ≥2 g/dL, hemodynamic instability, colonoscopy, angiography, or surgery) within 30 days of colonoscopy (called delayed PPB) were collected during telephone interviews or hospital visits 7 and 30 days after colonoscopy. The primary outcome was the incidence of important post-polypectomy bleeding.

RESULTS

Twelve patients in the hemoclip group (2.3%) and 15 patients in the no hemoclip group (2.9%) had important delayed PPB. There were no deaths, and no patients in either group required angiography or surgery. In intention-to-treat analysis, two 1-sided test's lower and upper confidence interval limits were -2.07 and 1.01, indicating that the data approached but did not meet equivalence criteria. On multiple logistic regression analysis, significant predictors of PPB included use of warfarin with bridging, thienopyridines, polyp size, and polyp location, but hemoclip placement did not associate with important delayed PPB.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized trial, we found that prophylactic placement of hemoclips after removal of large colon polyps does not affect the proportion of important delayed PPB events, compared with no hemoclip placement. These findings call into question the widespread, expensive practice of routinely placing prophylactic hemoclips after polypectomy. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01647581.

Endoscopic Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is one of the most common complications of endoscopic polypectomy. There are multiple risk factors related to patient and polyp characteristics that should be considered. In most cases, immediate PPB can be effectively managed endoscopically when recognized and managed promptly. Delayed PPB can manifest in a myriad of ways. In severe delayed PPB, resuscitation for hemodynamic stabilization should be prioritized, followed by endoscopic evaluation and therapy once the patient is stabilized. Future areas of research in PPB include the risks of direct oral anticoagulants and of specific electrosurgical settings for hot-snare polypectomy vs. cold-snare polypectomy, benefits of closure of post-polypectomy mucosal defects using through-the-scope clips, and prospective comparative evaluation of newer hemostasis agents such as hemostatic spray powder and over-the-scope clips.

Clips for managing perforation and bleeding after colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection

INTRODUCTION

The most commonly used treatment for advanced colorectal adenomas is endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The increased number of EMRs since the introduction of the screening program for colorectal cancer has resulted in an increase in EMR-related complications. This review summarizes the current knowledge for the use of clips for the treatment and prevention of complications after EMR.

AREAS COVERED

The historical development of clips is summarized and their properties are evaluated. An overview is presented of the evidence for therapeutic and prophylactic clipping for bleeding or perforation after EMR in the colon. Several clipping techniques are discussed in relation to the efficacy of wound closure. Furthermore, new techniques that will likely influence the use of clips in the future endoscopic practice, such as endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) are also highlighted.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Most research focuses on prophylactic clipping for delayed bleeding after EMR of large adenomas. We advocate a distance of 0.5-1.0 cm between aligning clips. This focus may likely shift from bleeding to perforation. Here, endoscopic treatment with through-the-scope clips and large-diameter clips may well replace surgery. The future role of clips will also depend on the further development of new endoscopic technologies, such as eFTR.

Colonoscopy, Polypectomy, and the Risk of Bleeding

Colonoscopy with polypectomy is the means by which the incidence of colon cancer may be reduced; however, polypectomy is not without risk. Physicians must carefully weigh the risks and benefits of colonoscopy, particularly when patients are given prescriptions for antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. This article discusses the risks of colonoscopy and polypectomy and reviews the most recent data for managing antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants in the periendoscopic period.

Risk factors for delayed hemorrhage after colonoscopic postpolypectomy: Polyp size and operative modality

Background and Aim

Delayed postpolypectomy hemorrhage is relatively common, with occasional extensive blood loss, endangering life. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with postoperative hemorrhage.

Methods

The study was a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized for colonoscopic polypectomy at the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, China, between January and December 2015. Data on gender, age, bowel preparation, location, size, number of polyps, operative modality, pathology, and operation practitioner were collected. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of postoperative hemorrhage.

Results

A total of 1962 polyps were detected in patients and they underwent polypectomy; hemorrhage occurred in 41 cases. A correlation was demonstrated between postpolypectomy hemorrhage and each of the following factors: polyp size and operative modality. The odds ratio (OR) was 4.535 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.331–8.823) for 1–2‐cm polyps, 4.008 (95% CI, 0.904–17.776) for 2–3‐cm polyps, and 22.407 (95% CI, 5.783–86.812) for ≥3‐cm polyps. Compared with argon plasma coagulation, OR was 9.128 (95% CI, 3.548–23.486) for endoscopic mucosal resection and 31.257 (95% CI, 7.009–139.395) for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Conclusions

The independent risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy hemorrhage include polyp size and operative modality.

Safety of Cold Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps in Patients on Antithrombotic Medication

BACKGROUND

The cold polypectomy (CP) technique has been increasingly used in recent years. However, there have been few studies about post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients who underwent CP and who were on antithrombotic drugs. The objective of this study was to determine the safety of CP in patients on antithrombotic medication.

METHODS

The subjects were patients who underwent CP in our hospital between April 2014 and March 2016. PPB rates were examined in relation to the use of antithrombotic medication.

RESULTS

CP was performed to remove 2,466 polyps in 1,003 patients. There were 549 polyps (22.3%) in186 patients in the antithrombotic group and 1,917 polyps (77.7%) in 817 patients in the non-antithrombotic group. PPB occurred in 0.55% (3/549) of patients in the antithrombotic group and in 0.10% (2/1,917) of patients in the non-antithrombotic group, showing no significant difference (p = 0.07). Patients in the antithrombotic group in whom PPB occurred included 1 aspirin user with 1 polyp and 1 aspirin plus clopidogrel user with 2 polyps. No PPB occurred in patients on other antithrombotic agents or receiving heparin bridging. There was no significant difference between PPB rates in patients with small polyps (6-9 mm) in the antithrombotic and non-antithrombotic groups, but there was a significant difference between PPB rates in the 2 groups for patients with diminutive group (1-5 mm).

CONCLUSION

CP is a safe procedure even in patients on antithrombotic medication.

Diagnostic performance of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy using magnifying endoscope with narrow-band imaging for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In Japan, an increase in the number of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy procedures is expected because several studies have reported that endoscopy screening has reduced gastric cancer mortality. Magnifying narrow-band imaging has been reported to be effective for accurate diagnosis of gastric abnormalities such as cancers, adenomas, and intestinal metaplasia. However, the efficacy of this method in routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy has not been clarified.

METHODS

We divided 3763 patients into two groups. The non-magnification group included 1842 patients who underwent endoscopy screening using GIF-H260/LUCERA-SPECTRUM between October 2014 and February 2015, whereas the magnification group included 1921 patients who underwent screening using GIF-H290Z/LUCERA-ELITE between March 2015 and May 2015. In the magnification group, diagnosis of cancer was conducted using the VS classification system. We did not carry out a biopsy when results were confirmed as non-cancer using magnifying narrow-band imaging. If cancer was diagnosed, or when a cancer or non-cancer diagnosis was difficult, we carried out a biopsy. We analyzed and compared the diagnostic performance between the two groups.

RESULTS

Gastric biopsy rate was significantly lower in the magnification group (29%) than in the non-magnification group (41%) (P < 0.001). Positive predictive value (PPV) for gastric cancer was significantly higher in the magnification group (5.5%) than in the non-magnification group (2.5%) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, PPV for gastric epithelial neoplasia was significantly higher in the magnification group (7.9%) than in the non-magnification group (3.2%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Magnifying narrow-band imaging improves the diagnostic performance of routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

Clinical outcome of endoscopic management in delayed postpolypectomy bleeding

Background/Aims

The clinical course after endoscopic management of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) has not been clearly determined. This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes after endoscopic hemostasis of DPPB and evaluate risk factors for rebleeding after initial hemostasis.

Methods

We reviewed medical records of 198 patients who developed DPPB and underwent endoscopic hemostasis between January 2010 and February 2015. The performance of endoscopic hemostasis was assessed. Rebleeding negative and positive patients were compared.

Results

DPPB developed 1.4±1.6 days after colonoscopic polypectomy. All patients achieved initial hemostasis. Clipping was the most commonly used technique. Of 198 DPPB patients, 15 (7.6%) had rebleeding 3.3±2.5 days after initial hemostasis. The number of clips required for hemostasis was higher in the rebleeding positive group (3.2±1.6 vs. 4.2±1.9, P=0.047). Combinations of clipping with other modalities such as injection methods were more common in the rebleeding positive group (67/291, 23.0% vs. 12/17, 70.6%; P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed a large number of clips and combination therapy were independent risk factors for rebleeding. All the rebleeding cases were successfully managed by repeat endoscopic hemostasis.

Conclusions

Endoscopic hemostasis is effective for the management of DPPB because of its high initial hemostasis rate and low rebleeding rate. Endoscopists should carefully observe patients in whom a large number of clips and/or combination therapy have been used to manage DPPB because these may be related to the severity of DPPB and a higher risk of rebleeding.

Clipping prevents perforation in large, flat polyps

AIM

To determine if prophylactic clipping of post-polypectomy endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) mucosal defects of large, flat, right sided polyps prevents perforations.

METHODS

IRB approved review of all colonoscopies, and prospective data collection of grasp and snare EMR performed by 2 endoscopists between January 1, 2010 and March 31, 2014 in a community ambulatory endoscopy center. The study consisted of two phases. In the first phase, all right-sided, flat polyps greater than or equal to 1.2 cm in size were removed using the grasp and snare technique. Clipping was done at the discretion of the endoscopist. In the second phase, all mucosal defects were closed using resolution clips. Phase 2 of the study was powered to detect a statistically significant difference in perforation rate with 148 EMRs, if less than or equal to 2 perforations occurred.

RESULTS

In phase 1 of the study, 2121 colonoscopies were performed. Seventy-five patients had 95 large polyps removed. There were 4 perforations in 95 polypectomies (4.2%). The perforations occurred in polyps ranging in size from 1.5 cm to 2.5 cm. In phase 2, there were 2464 colonoscopies performed. One hundred and sixteen patients had 151 large polyps removed, and all mucosal defects were clipped. There were no perforations (P = 0.0016). There were no post-polypectomy hemorrhages in either phase. An average of 2.15 clips were required to close the mucosal defects. The median time to perform the polypectomy and clipping was 13 min, and the median procedure duration was 40 min. Five percent of all patients undergoing colonoscopy in our community based, ambulatory endoscopy center had flat, right sided polyps greater than or equal to 1.2 cm in size.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic clipping of the mucosal resection defect of large, right-sided, flat polyps reduces the incidence of perforation.

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding-Computed Tomographic Angiography, Colonoscopy or both?

Background

Lower endoscopy (LE) is the standard diagnostic modality for lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Conversely, computed tomographic angiography (CTA) offers an immediate non-invasive diagnosis visualizing the entire gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this study was to compare these 2 modalities with regards to diagnostic value and bleeding control.

Methods

Tertiary center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted for LGIB between 2006 and 2012. Comparison of patients with LE vs. CTA as first exam, respectively, with emphasis on diagnostic accuracy and bleeding control.

Results

Final analysis included 183 patients; 122 (66.7%) had LE first, while 32 (17.5%) had CTA; 29 (15.8%) had neither of both exams. Median time to CTA was shorter compared to LE (3 (IQR = 8.2) vs. 22 (IQR = 36.9) hours, P < 0.001). Active bleeding was identified in 31% with CTA vs. 15% with LE (P = 0.031); a non-actively bleeding source was found by CTA and LE in 22 vs. 31%, respectively (P = 0.305). Bleeding control required endoscopy in 19%, surgery in 14% and embolization in 1.6%, while 66% were treated conservatively. Post-interventional bleeding was mostly controlled by endoscopic therapy (57%). 80% of patients with active bleeding on CTA required surgery.

Conclusions

Post-interventional LGIB was effectively addressed by LE. For other causes of LGIB, CTA was efficient, and more available than colonoscopy. Treatment was conservative for most patients. In case of active bleeding, CTA could localize the bleeding source and predict the need for surgery.

A Korean Multi-Center Survey about Warfarin Management before Gastroenterological Endoscopy in Patients with a History of Mechanical Valve Replacement Surgery

Background

Guidelines for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in the West allow the continued use of warfarin under therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) level. In Korea, no guidelines have been issued regarding warfarin treatment before EGD. The authors surveyed Korean cardiac surgeons about how Korean cardiac surgeons handle warfarin therapy before EGD using a questionnaire. Participants were requested to make decisions regarding the continuation of warfarin therapy in two hypothetical cases.

Methods

The questionnaire was administered to cardiac surgeons and consisted of eight questions, including two case scenarios.

Results

Thirty-six cardiac surgeons at 28 hospitals participated in the survey, and 52.7% of the participants chose to stop warfarin before EGD in aortic valve replacement patients without risk factors for thromboembolism. When the patient’s INR level was 2, 31% of the participants indicated that they would choose to continue warfarin therapy. For EGD with biopsy, 72.2% of the participants chose warfarin withdrawal, and 25% of the participants chose heparin replacement. In mitral valve replacement patients, 47.2% of the participants chose to discontinue warfarin, and 22.2% of the participants chose heparin replacement. For EGD with biopsy in patients with a mitral valve replacement, 58.3% of the participants chose to stop warfarin, and 41.7% of the participants chose heparin replacement.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that attitudes regarding warfarin treatment for EGD are very different among Korean surgeons. Guidelines specific to the Korean population are required.

Complications of endoscopic polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon

Endoscopic resection (ER), including endoscopic polypectomy (EP), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used to remove superficial neoplasms from the colon. Snare resection is used for EP and EMR, whereas endoscopic knives are used to perform dissection in the submucosal space in ESD. 80-90% colonic polyps are <10 millimetres (mm) and are effectively managed by conventional EP. Increasingly cold snare polypectomy is preferred. Large laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) and sessile polyps ≥20 mm are primarily removed by EMR. ESD may be used when superficial invasive disease is suspected and for some LSLs, particularly non-granular subtypes. Resection of colonic lesions by ER is associated with a small but definite incidence of significant complications, most commonly bleeding and perforation. This review discusses complications of ER with a particular focus on their prevention, early recognition and management. In many cases, complications from all three procedures share similar mechanisms and management principles and these are described at the start of each section, followed by a description of specific aspects for individual procedures.

Quality assurance manual of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer in Japanese communities

The Japanese government introduced endoscopic screening for gastric cancer in 2015 as a public policy based on the Japanese guidelines on gastric cancer screening. To provide appropriate endoscopic screening for gastric cancer in Japanese communities, we developed a quality assurance manual of endoscopic screening and recommend 10 strategies with their brief descriptions as follows: (i) Formulation of a committee responsible for implementing and managing endoscopic screening, and for deciding the suitable implementation methods in consideration of the local context; (ii) Development of an interpretation system that leads to a final judgement to standardize endoscopic examination and improve its accuracy; (iii) Preparation of management and reporting systems for adverse effects by the committee for safety management; (iv) Obtaining informed consent before operation following adequate explanations regarding the benefits and harms of endoscopic screening; (v) Avoidance of frequent screenings to reduce false-positive results and overdiagnosis. As a reference, the target age group is ≥50 years, and the screening interval is 2 years; (vi) Keeping the biopsy rate within 10% as post-biopsy bleeding may occur. Before endoscopic screening, any history of antithrombotic drug usage should be checked; (vii) Nonadministration of sedation in endoscopic screening for safety management; (viii) Adherence to proper endoscopic cleaning and disinfection to reduce infection; (ix) Use of a checklist to achieve optimal program preparation when municipal governments introduce endoscopic screening; (x) Identification of the aims and roles by referring to a checklist if primary care physicians decide to participate in endoscopic screening.

A Scoring System to Determine Risk of Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Colorectal Lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

After endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal lesions, delayed bleeding is the most common serious complication, but there are no guidelines for its prevention. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with delayed bleeding that required medical attention after discharge until day 15 and develop a scoring system to identify patients at risk.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 1214 consecutive patients with nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 20 mm or larger treated by EMR (n = 1255) at 23 hospitals in Spain, from February 2013 through February 2015. Patients were examined 15 days after the procedure, and medical data were collected. We used the data to create a delayed bleeding scoring system, and assigned a weight to each risk factor based on the β parameter from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Patients were classified as being at low, average, or high risk for delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

Delayed bleeding occurred in 46 cases (3.7%, 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-4.9%). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with delayed bleeding included age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.36; P < .01), American Society of Anesthesiologist classification scores of III or IV (OR, 1.90; P ≤ .05), aspirin use during EMR (OR, 3.16; P < .05), right-sided lesions (OR, 4.86; P < .01), lesion size ≥40 mm (OR, 1.91; P ≤ .05), and a mucosal gap not closed by hemoclips (OR, 3.63; P ≤ .01). We developed a risk scoring system based on these 6 variables that assigned patients to the low-risk (score, 0-3), average-risk (score, 4-7), or high-risk (score, 8-10) categories with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83). In these groups, the probabilities of delayed bleeding were 0.6%, 5.5%, and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions is 3.7%. We developed a risk scoring system based on 6 factors that determined the risk for delayed bleeding (receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.77). The factors most strongly associated with delayed bleeding were right-sided lesions, aspirin use, and mucosal defects not closed by hemoclips. Patients considered to be high risk (score, 8-10) had a 40% probability of delayed bleeding.

Multicenter randomized controlled study to assess the effect of prophylactic clipping on post-polypectomy delayed bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Prophylactic clipping has been widely used to prevent post-procedural bleeding in colon polypctomy. However, its efficiency has not been confirmed and there is no consensus on the usefulness of prophylactic clipping. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the preventive effect of prophylactic clipping on post-polypectomy bleeding.

METHODS

A multicenter randomized controlled study was conducted from January 2012 to July 2013 in Japan. Patients who had polyps <2 cm in diameter were divided into a clipping group and a non-clipping group by cluster randomization. After endoscopic polypectomy, patients allocated to the clipping group underwent prophylactic clipping, whereas the procedure was completed without clipping in patients allocated to the non-clipping group. Occurrence of post-polypectomy bleeding was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Seven hospitals participated in this study. A total of 3365 polyps in 1499 patients were evaluated. The clipping group consisted of 1636 polyps in 752 patients, and the non-clipping group consisted of 1729 polyps in 747 patients. Post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 1.10% (18/1636) of the cases in the clipping group, and in 0.87% (15/1729) of those in the non-clipping group. The difference was -0.22% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.96, 0.53). Upper limit of the 95% CI was lower than the non-inferiority margin (1.5%), and we could thus prove non-inferiority of non-clipping against clipping.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic clipping is not necessary to prevent post-polypectomy bleeding for polyps <2 cm in diameter.

Endoluminal Instrumentation Is Changing Gastrointestinal Surgery

Advances in endoluminal instrumentation and technology are enabling endoscopists to perform increasingly sophisticated procedures. Indications for these procedures are likely to expand as outcomes studies show they are efficacious and cost-effective. This article highlights several recent advances in endoluminal suturing, dissecting, and ligating and discusses the impact of these advances on the practice of gastrointestinal surgery. Endoluminal suturing offers select patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease a safe and effective alternative to laparoscopic surgery. Devices designed for endoluminal hemostasis and endoscopic mucosal resection can be used effectively for a broader range of applications and are already being used to perform transluminal surgery in animal models; human trials are forthcoming. Gastrointestinal surgeons should support efforts to critically evaluate endoluminal techniques because they have an opportunity to improve care. Surgical residents planning careers in gastrointestinal surgery need to understand endoscopic techniques and consider their training opportunities.

Closure with clips to accelerate healing of mucosal defects caused by colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND

Most mucosal defects that occur with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be closed completely using endoscopic clips. However, benefits of such closure in wound healing are unknown. A randomized controlled study evaluated the efficacy of closure with clips compared with no closure.

METHOD

Twenty-eight patients who had undergone ESD were randomly divided into two groups: closure (n = 14) and non-closure groups (n = 14). In the closure group, the mucosal defect resulting from ESD was closed using endoscopic clips. Four weeks after ESD, defects in both groups were observed by colonoscopy. Efficacy was based on change in the area of the defect, percentage of complete healing in each group, and complications.

RESULT

Data were analyzed for 26 of the 28 patients (13, closure group; 13, non-closure group). All tumors were resected en bloc by ESD without bleeding or perforation. In the closure group, the area of the defect just after ESD was 677 ± 306 mm(2) (mean ± SD) as determined by the size of the removed lesion and had decreased to 2.17 ± 4.51 mm(2) at 4 weeks after ESD (reduction, 99.7 %), but in the non-closure group that area was 790 ± 221 mm(2) and had decreased to 27.42 ± 25.72 mm(2) at 4 weeks post-ESD (reduction, 96.2 %). The reduction rate was significantly higher in the closure than in the non-closure group (99.7 vs. 96.2 %, p = 0.010). Complete healing was 69.2 % in the closure group vs. 7.7 % in the non-closure group (p = 0.005). Multivariate analysis showed that closure of the mucosal defect (OR 24.029, 95 % CI 2.09-276.15, p = 0.011) was an independent factor associated with complete healing at 4 weeks after ESD. Delayed perforation or post-ESD bleeding was not observed in any participant.

CONCLUSION

Use of endoscopic clips for closure of defects after ESD is safe and efficacious in accelerating wound healing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR UMIN000009112.

Improving the utility of colonoscopy: Recent advances in practice

Colonoscopy is a frequently performed diagnostic and therapeutic test and the primary screening tool in several nationalized bowel cancer screening programs. There has been a considerable focus on maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. This has occurred in four key areas: Optimizing patient selection to reduce unnecessary or low yield colonoscopy has offered cost-benefit improvements in population screening. Improving quality assurance, through the development of widely accepted quality metrics for use in individual practice and the research setting, has offered measurable improvements in colonoscopic yield. Significant improvements have been demonstrated in colonoscopic technique, from the administration of preparation to the techniques employed during withdrawal of the colonoscope. Improved techniques to avoid post-procedural complications have also been developed-further maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. The aim of this review is to summarize the recent evidence-based advances in colonoscopic practice that contribute to the optimal practice of colonoscopy.

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.

Mechanical Hemostasis Techniques in Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

One of the most important advances in gastroenterology has been the use of endoscopic hemostasis techniques to control nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, particularly when high-risk stigmata are present. Several options are available, including injection therapy, sprays/topical agents, electrocautery, and mechanical methods. The method chosen depends on the nature of the lesion and experience of the endoscopist. This article reviews the available mechanical hemostatic modalities.

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 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.

Safety of gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy in patients taking antithrombotics

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Current Japanese gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic guidelines permit endoscopic biopsy without cessation of antiplatelet agents and warfarin in patients with a therapeutic range of prothrombin time-international normalized ratio (PT-INR) levels, although the evidence levels are low. We evaluated the safety of endoscopic biopsy in patients currently taking antithrombotics.

METHODS

Consecutive patients receiving antithrombotics who underwent GI endoscopy from August 2012 to August 2013 were enrolled. Adverse events and endoscopic hemostasis after biopsy were evaluated. PT-INR level was measured in patients taking warfarin the day before endoscopy.

RESULTS

Among 7939 patients undergoing endoscopy, 1034 patients (13.0%, 706 men and 328 women, average age 72.8 years) were receiving antithrombotics. Antithrombotics included aspirin (44.8%), warfarin (34.7%), thienopyridine (16.1%), cilostazol (10.3%), dabigatran (4.8%) etc. PT-INR levels in patients taking warfarin were >3.0 in 13 patients (4.3%), between 2.5 and 3.0 in 18 patients (6.0%), <2.5 in 269 patients (89.7%). Two hundred and six patients received endoscopic biopsy while taking aspirin (51.2%), warfarin (22.8%), and thienopyridine (13.6%). Endoscopic hemostasis was required in three patients after endoscopic biopsy (spraying thrombin in two patients, spraying thrombin and clipping in one patient). There were no major complications. The incidence of endoscopic hemostasis after biopsy in patients without antithrombotic cessation was not significantly different than in the controls not taking antithrombotics (1.5% vs 0.98%, P = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic biopsy did not increase the bleeding risk despite not stopping antithrombotics prior to biopsy even among patients taking warfarin whose PT-INR was within the therapeutic range.

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.

Usefulness and safety of endoscopic treatment for nonampullary duodenal adenoma and adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Safety and efficacy data on endoscopic treatment of duodenal neoplasm are limited. We suggest the technical feasibility of endoscopic procedures by evaluating the results of endoscopic treatment for nonampullary duodenal adenoma and adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Forty-five patients who underwent endoscopic treatment for nonampullary duodenal adenoma with or without malignant transformation between September 2003 and March 2012 were included. Endoscopic polypectomy of duodenal polyp (DPP), duodenal endoscopic mucosal resection (DEMR), and duodenal endoscopic submucosal dissection (DESD) were selected as endoscopic treatments for each lesion.

RESULTS

Mean lesion size was 9.1 mm, and most lesions were located in the second portion of the duodenum. There were 40 adenomas and five early-stage adenocarcinomas arising from adenomas. Of the 45 duodenal neoplasms, five patients were treated with DPP, 33 with DEMR, and seven patients with a large duodenal lesion underwent DESD. Minimum of 1-year follow-up endoscopies were performed in 42 patients, excepting three patients treated after October 2011. Median follow-up was 24.8 months. Of the 45 patients, en bloc resection was performed in 43 (95.6%). A complete resection was performed in 41 patients (91.1%). No significant bleeding events occurred. Perforations occurred in three patients who underwent DESD. All perforations were noticed during the procedures and completely closed by endoscopic clipping. There was one recurrence at 6 months after DPP.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment is minimally invasive management for duodenal adenomas and superficial adenocarcinomas. It would be helpful for medical doctors in the management of duodenal neoplasms.

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage following removal of large polyps using mechanical haemostasis or epinephrine: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage (PPH) is a known adverse event that can occur following polypectomy, occurring in 0.3-6.1% of cases. Previous meta-analysis has included small polyps, which are less likely to bleed, and less amenable to some methods of mechanical haemostasis. No comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of this topic is available. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials and a cost-benefit analysis of prophylactic haemostasis in PPH.

METHODS

A total of 3092 abstracts from prospective trials conducted in human colonoscopic polypectomy were screened. Outpatients undergoing polypectomy in seven suitable studies (1426 episodes), without polyposis syndromes or bleeding diathesis, were identified. The interventions of prophylactic haemostatic measures (clips, loops, and/or adrenaline injection) to prevent PPH were assessed. The main outcome measurements were PPH measured by haematochezia or drop in haematocrit >10% or haemoglobin >1 g/dl. Risk ratio and number needed to treat (NNT) were generated using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Comparing any prophylactic haemostasis to none, the pooled risk ratio for PPH was 0.35 (0.21-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT was 13.6, and cost to prevent one PPH was USD652. Using adrenaline alone vs. no prophylactic haemostasis revealed a pooled risk ratio of 0.37 (0.20-0.66; p = 0.001), NNT 14.0, cost to prevent one PPH USD382. Any prophylactic mechanical haemostasis compared to adrenaline produced a RR for PPH of 0.28 (0.14-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT 12.3, and cost to prevent one PPH USD1368.

CONCLUSIONS

Adrenaline injection or mechanical haemostasis reduces the risk of PPH. Routine prophylactic measures to reduce PPH for polyps larger than 10 mm are potentially cost effective, although more thorough cost-benefit modelling is required.

Cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive polyps in the colorectum

Adequate colonoscopic polypectomy is a very important intervention for the prevention of colorectal cancer progression during screening and surveillance colonoscopy. Whereas various techniques are used for the removal of diminutive polyps, including cold biopsy forceps, hot biopsy forceps, hot snare, and cold snare, hot polypectomy techniques with electrocautery have been associated with an increased risk of electrocautery-related complications, including immediate and/or delayed bleeding or perforation. In contrast, recent studies have found a polypectomy technique without electrocautery, so-called cold polypectomy, to be a safer and more efficacious technique. The present article discusses the use of cold polypectomy techniques and describes how cold biopsy forceps polypectomy using jumbo biopsy forceps designed with a greater capacity for removing larger tissue samples, and cold snare polypectomy, are adequate for removing diminutive polyps completely and safely and shorten withdrawal time of the colonoscopy procedure.

Polysaccharide hemostatic system for hemostasis management in colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection

BACKGROUND

A new polysaccharide hemostatic system (EndoClot(TM) ) was recently developed for bleeding control in gastrointestinal tract endoscopy; however, its efficacy and safety is not yet well established in colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The aim of the present study was to observe the bleeding control effect after EMR in the colorectum.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

EndoClot(TM) was applied immediately to mucosal defects after resection whether or not there was post-resection bleeding. Bleeding was monitored post-procedurally by clinical findings including positive stool occult blood test and by second-look endoscopy. Hemostasis, rebleeding rates and treatment-related complications were observed.

RESULTS

In total, 82 patients were enrolled, totaling 181 lesions. Among them, 20 lesions in 18 cases showed bleeding immediately after the procedure. Among them, two lesions were treated by combined hot biopsy forceps, and complete hemostasis was achieved in all cases without surgery. It took 1.1 min (0.4-2.1) tocarry out hemostasis treatment. Rebleeding with positive stool test and colonoscopy recurred in three of 18 patients with immediate post-procedural bleeding. In patients without immediate post-procedural bleeding, three patients were confirmed with delayed bleeding. No major adverse events of treatment or procedure-related serious adverse events were reported during a 30-day follow up. Colonoscopy was done in selected patients at 30 days and full recovery of mucosal defect was achieved in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Polysaccharide hemostatic system effectively achieves hemostasis in controlling and preventing EMR-related bleeding with the advantage of simple application; thus it might be a useful alternative in treating bleeding endoscopically.

Guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy in patients undergoing antithrombotic treatment

Guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy in patients undergoing antithrombotic treatment have been produced by the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society in collaboration with the Japan Circulation Society, the Japanese Society of Neurology, the Japan Stroke Society, the Japanese Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis and the Japan Diabetes Society. Previous guidelines from the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society have focused primarily on prevention of hemorrhage after gastroenterological endoscopy as a result of continuation ofantithrombotic therapy, without considering the associated risk of thrombosis. The new edition of the guidelines includes discussions of gastroenterological hemorrhage associated with continuation of antithrombotic therapy, as well as thromboembolism associated with withdrawal of antithrombotic therapy.