1
|
Turan AS, Pohl H, Matsumoto M, Lee BS, Aizawa M, Desideri F, Albéniz E, Raju GS, Luba D, Barret M, Gurudu SR, Ramirez FC, Lin WR, Atsma F, Siersema PD, van Geenen EJM. The Role of Clips in Preventing Delayed Bleeding After Colorectal Polyp Resection: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20:362-371.e23. [PMID: 33991691 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2021] [Accepted: 05/02/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Nonpedunculated colorectal polyps are normally endoscopically removed to prevent neoplastic progression. Delayed bleeding is the most common major adverse event. Clipping the resection defect has been suggested to reduce delayed bleedings. Our aim was to determine if prophylactic clipping reduces delayed bleedings and to analyze the contribution of polyp characteristics, extent of defect closure, and antithrombotic use. METHODS An individual patient data meta-analysis was performed. Studies on prophylactic clipping in nonpedunculated colorectal polyps were selected from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane database (last selection, April 2020). Authors were invited to share original study data. The primary outcome was delayed bleeding ≤30 days. Multivariable mixed models were used to determine the efficacy of prophylactic clipping in various subgroups adjusted for confounders. RESULTS Data of 5380 patients with 8948 resected polyps were included from 3 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective, and 8 retrospective studies. Prophylactic clipping reduced delayed bleeding in proximal polyps ≥20 mm (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.88; number needed to treat = 32), especially with antithrombotics (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.35-0.99; number needed to treat = 23; subgroup of anticoagulants/double platelet inhibitors: n = 226; OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.16-1.01; number needed to treat = 12). Prophylactic clipping did not benefit distal polyps ≥20 mm with antithrombotics (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.79-2.52). CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic clipping reduces delayed bleeding after resection of nonpedunculated, proximal colorectal polyps ≥20 mm, especially in patients using antithrombotics. No benefit was found for distal polyps. Based on this study, patients can be identified who may benefit from prophylactic clipping. (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020104317.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ayla S Turan
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Heiko Pohl
- Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA White River Junction, White River Junction, Vermont
| | - Mio Matsumoto
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sapporo Medical Center NTT EC, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Brian S Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Riverside School of Medicine, Riverside, California
| | - Masato Aizawa
- Department of Coloproctology, Aizu Medical Center Fukushima Medical University, Aizuwakamatsu, Japan
| | - Federico Desideri
- Digestive and Liver Disease Department, Endoscopy Unit, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy; Gastroenterology Department, San Maurizio Hospital, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Eduardo Albéniz
- Department of Gastroenterology, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Navarrabiomed Biomedical Research Center, UPNA, IdiSNA, Pamplona, Spain
| | | | - Daniel Luba
- Monterey Bay Gastroenterology Consultants, Monterey, California
| | - Maximilien Barret
- Department of Gastroenterology, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, Université de Paris, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Wey-Ran Lin
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan
| | - Femke Atsma
- Department of IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Peter D Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Erwin J M van Geenen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Management of the colonic polyps referred for surgery: an opportunity for improvement. Surg Endosc 2021; 36:5392-5397. [PMID: 34750703 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08858-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 10/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To examine local practice for non-malignant polyps and to calculate morbidity and mortality associated with bowel resection for this indication. METHODS This retrospective cohort study was conducted by reviewing our local gastrointestinal pathology database over a five-year period to identify colonic resections performed for benign polyps. Using search terms "polyp" and "adenoma," 272 cases were identified. Exclusion criteria included: cancer diagnosis, emergency surgeries, multiple resections, and subtotal colectomies for polyposis. 106 patients were included in the study. Primary outcome was perioperative mortality. Secondary outcomes included patient morbidity, characteristics of polyps requiring surgery, and the number of patients referred for a second endoscopic opinion prior to proceeding with surgery. RESULTS 64 male and 42 female patients with a mean age of 65.3 years (± 8.6 years) underwent colon resection for benign polyps. The mean polyp size was 32.7 mm (± 19.5 mm). 30 patients (28.6%) had polyps equal to or less than 2 cm. Most of the polyps described were sessile (n = 55, 51.9%) and located in the right colon (n = 84, 79.3%). Endoscopic resection was attempted in 31 patients (29.2%), and five cases (4.7%) were referred for a second endoscopic opinion prior to proceeding with surgery. Endoscopists incorrectly felt that polyps were malignant in 62 cases (58.5%). Using Clavien-Dindo classification, most patients had no complications n = 36 (34.0%) or minor complications n = 41 (38.7%). Twelve patients (11.3%) had complications that required antibiotics, blood transfusions, or total parental nutrition. Nine patients (8.5%) required surgical or endoscopic management. Six patients (5.7%) required ICU admission. Mortality rate was 1.9% (n = 2). CONCLUSION Surgery for benign colonic polyps is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. These findings reveal a gap in endoscopic management of benign colonic polyps.
Collapse
|
3
|
Li S, Monachese M, Salim M, Arya N, Sahai AV, Forbes N, Teshima C, Yaghoobi M, Chen YI, Lam E, James P. Standard reporting elements for the performance of EUS: Recommendations from the FOCUS working group. Endosc Ultrasound 2021; 10:84-92. [PMID: 33666183 PMCID: PMC8098847 DOI: 10.4103/eus-d-20-00234] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and Objectives Quality indicators for the performance of EUS have been developed to monitor and improve service value and patient outcomes. To support the incorporation of these indicators and standardize EUS documentation, we propose standard EUS reporting elements for endosonographers and endoscopy units. Methods A comprehensive literature search and review was performed to identify EUS quality indicators and key components of high-quality standardized EUS reporting. Guidance statements regarding standard EUS reporting elements were developed and reviewed at the Forum for Canadian Endoscopic Ultrasound (FOCUS) 2019 Annual Meeting. Results EUS reporting elements can be divided into preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural items. Preprocedural components include the type, indication, and urgency of the procedure and patient clinical information and consent. Intraprocedural components include the adequacy and extent of examination, relevant landmarks, lesion characteristics, sampling method, specimen quality, and intraprocedural adverse events. Postprocedural components include a summary and synthesis of relevant findings as well as recommended management and follow-up. Conclusions Standardizing reporting elements may help improve the care of patients undergoing EUS procedures. Our review provides a practical guide and compilation of recommended reporting elements to ensure ongoing best practices and quality improvement in EUS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suqing Li
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Marc Monachese
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Misbah Salim
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Naveen Arya
- Division of Gastroenterology, Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital, Oakville, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anand V Sahai
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Nauzer Forbes
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Christopher Teshima
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Calgary, Toronto, Canada
| | - Mohammad Yaghoobi
- Division of Gastroenterology, McMaster University Medical Center, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Yen-I Chen
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - Eric Lam
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Paul James
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The detection of early colorectal cancer has improved notably since the introduction of bowel cancer screening programmes. This has created new challenges from endoscopic, histological and therapeutic perspectives. Here, we outline the limitations of current clinical practice and ways of implementing optical diagnosis to overcome these limitations. RECENT FINDINGS Virtual chromoendoscopy without magnification for predicting or ruling out deep submucosal invasion is useful in real clinical practice for most lesions. However, magnifying virtual chromoendoscopy is needed to make an accurate diagnosis in nonulcerated narrow-band imaging international colorectal endoscopic (NICE) type 3 lesions or NICE type 2 lesions with depressed areas or of nodular mixed type. Finally, dye-based magnifying chromoendoscopy is needed in Japanese NBI Expert Team 2B lesions assessed with magnifying virtual chromoendoscopy. SUMMARY A four-step strategy is proposed, combining white-light assessment, virtual chromoendoscopy without magnification, virtual chromoendoscopy with magnification and dye-based chromoendoscopy with magnification.
Collapse
|