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

Bleeding Risk of Cold Versus Hot Snare Polypectomy for Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps Measuring 10 mm or Less: Subgroup Analysis of a Large Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Concerns regarding bleeding remain in cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for small pedunculated (0-Ip) polyps. The aim of this study was to compare the risk of CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for such lesions.

METHODS

Data on 0-Ip colorectal polyps ≤10 mm were extracted from a large, pragmatic, randomized trial. Immediate postpolypectomy bleeding (IPPB), defined as the perioperative use of a clip for bleeding, was evaluated through polyp-level analysis. Delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB), defined as bleeding occurring within 2 weeks postoperatively, was assessed at the patient-level among patients whose polyps were all ≤10 mm, including at least one 0-Ip polyp.

RESULTS

A total of 647 0-Ip polyps (CSP: 306; HSP: 341) were included for IPPB analysis and 386 patients (CSP: 192; HSP: 194) for DPPB analysis. CSP was associated with a higher incidence of IPPB (10.8% vs 3.2%, P < 0.001) but no adverse clinical events. The procedure time of all polypectomies was shorter for CSP than for HSP (123.0 ± 117.8 vs 166.0 ± 237.7 seconds, P = 0.003), while the procedure time of polypectomies with IPPB were similar (249.8 ± 140.2 vs 227.4 ± 125.9 seconds, P = 0.64). DPPB was observed in 3 patients (1.5%) in the HSP group, including one patient (0.5%) with severe bleeding, but not in the CSP group.

DISCUSSION

Despite CSP being associated with more IPPB events, it could be timely treated without adverse outcomes. Notably, no delayed bleeding occurred in the CSP group. Our findings support the use of CSP for 0-Ip polyps ≤ 10 mm.

Geometry of cold snare polypectomy and risk of incomplete resection

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is safer than and equally efficacious as hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for the removal of small (<10mm) colorectal polyps. The maximum polyp size that can be effectively managed by piecemeal CSP (p-CSP) without an excessive burden of recurrence is unknown.

METHODS

Resection error risks (RERs), defined as the estimated likelihood of incomplete removal of adenomatous tissue for a single snare resection pass, for CSP and HSP were calculated, based on an incomplete resection rate. Polyp area, snare size, estimated number of resections, and optimal resection defect area were modeled. Overall risk of incomplete resection (RIR) was defined as RIR=1 - (1 - p)n, where p is the RER and n the number of resections.

RESULTS

A 40-mm polyp has a four times greater area than a 20-mm polyp (314.16mm2 vs. 1256.64mm2), and requires three times more resections (11 vs. 33, respectively, assuming 8-mm piecemeal resection pieces for p-CSP). RIRs for a 40-mm polyp by HSP and p-CSP were 15.1%-23% and 40.74%-60.60% respectively.

CONCLUSION

RER is more important with p-CSP than with HSP. The number of resections, n, and consequently RIR increases with increasing polyp size. Given the overwhelming safety of CSP, specific techniques to minimize the RER should be studied and developed.

Effectiveness and safety of thin vs. thick cold snare polypectomy of small colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims Cold-snare polypectomy (CSP) is considered the standard of care for resection of colorectal polyps ≤10 mm. Data on the efficacy of CSP performed with thin-wire snares compared0 with thick-wire snares are conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis comparing complete resection (CR) and adverse event rates of CSP using thin-wire and thick-wire snares. Patients and methods Comparative studies of adult patients with ≧1 colorectal polyp(s) ≦10 mm who underwent CSP with thin-wire or thick-wire snares were included. We collected data on study, patient, polyp, and snare characteristics. The primary outcome was CR rate. Secondary outcomes were polyp retrieval rate, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed post-polypectomy bleeding, deep mural injury or perforation, patient discomfort, total sedation, and procedure time. We used random-effects models to calculate risk ratios for outcomes. We performed risk of bias assessments, rated the certainty of evidence, and assessed publication bias for all studies. Results We included four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two observational studies including 1316 patients with 1679 polyps (826 thin-wire CSPs and 853 thick-wire CSPs). There was no significant difference between thin-wire CSP (92.1%) and thick-wire CSP (87.7%) for RCTs (risk ratio [RR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-1.16) or observational studies (78.1% versus 79.6%, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.08). There were no significant differences in polyp retrieval rate or intraprocedural bleeding. There were no cases of delayed bleeding or perforation. Conclusions We found no differences in CR rates for CSP between thin-wire and thick-wire snares. CSP, regardless of snare type, is safe and effective for resection of small colorectal polyps.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cold snare polypectomy and hot snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has become increasingly utilized to resect colorectal polyps, given its efficacy and safety. This study aims to compare CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for resecting small (< 10 mm) and large (10-20 mm) colorectal lesions.

METHODS

Relevant publications were obtained from Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. The publication search was limited by English-language and human studies. Pooled mean difference and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled OR of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) in the CSP group versus the HSP group was 0.29 (P = 0.0001, I2  = 29%). Subgroup analysis according to lesion size showed a significant reduction in the DPPB rate in lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.08, P = 0.003, I2  = 0%) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.35, P = 0.001, I2  = 27%). Pooled OR of major bleeding in the CSP group was 0.23 (P = 0.0004, I2  = 0%). Subgroup analysis by lesion size revealed a significant decrease in the rate of major bleeding in the CSP group for both lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.11, P = 0.04) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.26, P = 0.003). Complete resection, en bloc resection, and recurrence rate were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cold snare polypectomy was associated with a lower rate of DPPB and lower risk of major bleeding compared with HSP in both small and large polyps. CSP should be considered as the polypectomy technique of choice for colorectal polyps.

Endoscopic Management of Large Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps

Large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm (LNPCPs) comprise approximately 1% of all colorectal polyps. LNPCPs more commonly contain high-grade dysplasia, covert and overt cancer. These lesions can be resected using several means, including conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold-snare EMR (C-EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This review aimed to provide a comprehensive, critical and objective analysis of ER techniques. Evidence-based, selective resection algorithms should be used when choosing the most appropriate technique to ensure the safe and effective removal of LNPCPs. Due to its enhanced safety and comparable efficacy, there has been a paradigm shift towards cold-snare polypectomy (CSP) for the removal of small polyps (<10 mm). This technique is now being applied to the management of LNPCPs; however, further research is required to define the optimal LNPCP subtypes to target and the viable upper size limit. Adjuvant techniques, such as thermal ablation of the resection margin, significantly reduce recurrence risk. Bleeding risk can be mitigated using through-the-scope clips to close defects in the right colon. Endoscopic surveillance is important to detect recurrence and synchronous lesions. Recurrence can be readily managed using an endoscopic approach.

Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colonic Adenomatous Polyps Sized 4-10 mm

Introduction: Colonoscopy with polypectomy is an efficacious procedure in reducing the risk of colorectal cancer development, the precursor are adenomatous polyps. The most common method for resection of polyps measuring 4-10 mm are cold (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). CSP has a lower incidence of adverse events, especially delayed post-polypectomy bleeding. Aim: To evaluate the presence of immediate and delayed bleeding in the cold snare polypectomy of sub-centimeter polyps of the colon compared with hot snare polypectomy. Materials and Methods: This prospective clinical study is comprised all patients who were incidentally detected to have adenomatous colonic polyps measuring 4-10 mm during a colonoscopy screening. Polypectomy was done with (hot snare) or without electrocautery (cold snare). After removal of polyps, immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and methods for were analyzed. Results: The CSP and HSP groups included 116 patients, 113 (54.4%) polyps in 61 (52.6%) patients with CSP while 95 (45.6%) polyps in 55 (47.4%) patients with HSP. 25 (22.1%) polyps after CSP had immediate bleeding. In 5 patients (20.0%), five hemostatic clips were inserted after CSP for bleeding longer than 150 sek. The average percentage difference between immediate bleeding versus total number of resected polyps using the cold snare method is not statistically significant (p<0.05) (Difference test, p=0.0000). Delayed bleeding was not registered using this method. In the second investigated group (HSP), one patient had delayed bleeding. This was stopped with 2 clips. Immediate bleeding was not registered. Conclusion: CSP is safer than HSP in resecting colon polyps sized 4-10 mm, without risk of delayed bleeding.

A Comparative Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Hot Snare Polypectomy and Cold Snare Polypectomy for Removing Small Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Both cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) have been shown to be effective methods for removing small colorectal polyps, but the optimal method for achieving complete resection remains unclear. To address this issue, we conducted a systematic search of relevant articles using databases such as PubMed, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost. The search criteria included randomized controlled trials that compared CSP and HSP for small colorectal polyps ≤10 mm and the articles were screened based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data were analyzed using RevMan software (version 5.4; Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom), and meta-analysis was performed with outcomes measured using pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The Mantel-Haenszel random effect model was used to calculate the OR. We selected a total of 14 randomized controlled trials involving 11601 polyps for analysis. Pooled analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the incomplete resection rate between CSP and HSP (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.88-1.73, p-value: 0.27; I2: 51%), en bloc resection rate (OR: 0.66; 95%CI: 0.38-1.13; p: 0.13; I2: 60%), and polyp retrieval rate (OR: 0.97; 95%CI: 0.59-1.57; p: 0.89; I2: 17%). For safety endpoints, there is no statistically significant difference in intraprocedural bleeding rate between CSP and HSP per patient analysis (OR: 2.37, 95% CI: 0.74-7.54; p: 0.95; I2: 74%) and per polyp basis (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 0.72-4.72; p: 0.20; I2: 85%). CSP had lower OR for the delayed bleeding outcome when compared with the HSP group per patient basis (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.2-0.86; p: 0.02; I2: 25%), but not in the per polyp analysis (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.12-3; p: 0.53; I2: 0%). Total polypectomy time was significantly shorter in the CSP group (mean difference: -0.81 minutes; 95% CI: -0.96, -0.66; p:<0.00001; I2: 0%). Thus, CSP is both an efficacious and safe method for removing small colorectal polyps. Therefore, it can be recommended as a suitable alternative to HSP for the removal of small colorectal polyps. However, more studies are necessary to evaluate any long-term differences between the two methods such as polyp recurrence rates.

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.

From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s

Colonoscopy represents the most widespread and effective tool for the prevention and treatment of early stage preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in the panorama of cancer screening. In the world there are different approaches to the topic of colorectal cancer prevention and screening: different starting ages (45-50 years); different initial screening tools such as fecal occult blood with immunohistochemical or immune-enzymatic tests; recto-sigmoidoscopy; and colonoscopy. The key aspects of this scenario are composed of a proper bowel preparation that ensures a valid diagnostic examination, experienced endoscopist in detection of preneoplastic and early neoplastic lesions and open-minded to upcoming artificial intelligence-aided examination, knowledge in the field of resection of these lesions (from cold-snaring, through endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection, up to advanced tools), and management of complications.

Risk Factors of Delayed Bleeding After Cold Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding (DB) rarely occurs after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal polyps, but no large-scale studies have investigated this. The present study evaluated the rate, characteristics, and risk factors of DB of CSP.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study at 10 Japanese institutions. A total of 18,007 patients underwent CSP for colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm in size from March 2015 to September 2019, and cases of DB (DB group) were analyzed for the rate, antithrombotic drugs, polyp size, morphology, location, and risk factors. As a control, 269 non-bleeding cases (non-DB group) with 606 polyps who underwent CSP at the same 10 facilities in the 2-week study period were extracted.

RESULTS

We analyzed 26 DB cases with 28 lesions, and the total DB rate was 0.14% (26/18,007). The DB group had significantly higher rates of using antiplatelets (42.3% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.001) and anticoagulants (19.2% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.002), and significantly higher rates of polyp size ≥ 5 mm (67.9% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.015), rectal lesion (25.0% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.003), and polypoid lesion (89.3% vs. 55.3%, p < 0.001) than the non-DB group. A multivariate analysis (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval) for patient characteristics showed antiplatelet use (4.521; 1.817-11.249, p = 0.001) and anticoagulant use (7.866; 20.63-29.988, p = 0.003) as independent risk factors for DB. Polyp size ≥ 5 mm (3.251; 1.417-7.463, p = 0.005), rectal lesion (3.674; 1.426-9.465, p = 0.007), and polypoid lesion (7.087; 20.81-24.132, p = 0.002) were also risk factors for lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of DB was 0.14% and antithrombotic drug use, polyp size, location, and morphology were related to it.

Risk of Delayed Bleeding after Cold Snare Polypectomy in Patients with Antithrombotic Therapy

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy is being increasingly adopted; however, there are few reports of cold snare polypectomy regarding antithrombotic therapy.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the real-world safety of cold snare polypectomy during antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS

We collected data from consecutive patients undergoing cold snare polypectomy in a single hospital between 2013 and 2017. Indications for cold snare polypectomy were any ≤ 10 mm polyp. The primary outcome was delayed bleeding. We compared rates of delayed bleeding between patients with and without antithrombotic therapy and analyzed risk factors for delayed bleeding using binary logistic regression model with firth procedure.

RESULTS

In 2152 patients (mean age 67.6 years; male 1411), 4433 colorectal polyps (mean diameter 5.0 mm) underwent cold snare polypectomy. Clipping during the procedure was performed for 5.8%. Delayed bleeding occurred in 0.51% (11/2152) of patients and 0.25% (11/4433) of polyps, but no major delayed bleeding occurred. A total of 244 (11%) patients received antithrombotic therapy. Patients on antithrombotic therapy were older (p < 0.001), more likely male (p < 0.001) and had cold snare polypectomy in the proximal colon (p = 0.011). The rate of delayed bleeding was higher in patients on antithrombotic therapy (1.64% vs. non-antithrombotic therapy 0.37%, p = 0.009). Larger polyp size (> 5 mm), use of clips, and antithrombotic therapy were significant risk factors for delayed bleeding. There was no clear association between specific antithrombotic agents and delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed bleeding after cold snare polypectomy was rare even in patients with antithrombotic therapy, and no major delayed bleeding occurred.

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: Best Practices for Gastrointestinal Endoscopists

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an endoscopic technique used to remove sessile or flat lesions from the gastrointestinal tract. This article reviews EMR and focuses on large colorectal polyps, which constitute the most common indication for EMR. Various methods of polyp evaluation can help gastroenterologists determine whether EMR is feasible and whether referral to an advanced endoscopist may be necessary. Techniques for performing EMR include conventional hot-snare EMR with submucosal injection and electro-cautery snare removal of colorectal lesions, as well as alternative EMR techniques such as cold-snare EMR and underwater EMR. Key adverse events associated with EMR include bleeding, perforation, and post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome. Finally, as residual or recurrent polyp formation is possible regardless of EMR technique, this article addresses the importance of surveillance post-EMR and the patients who are at highest risk for polyp recurrence.

Risk of colonoscopy-related complications in a fecal immunochemical test-based population colorectal cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

The likelihood of advanced or synchronous neoplasms is significantly higher in fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-positive individuals than in the general population. The magnitude of the colonoscopy-related complication rate in FIT-positive individuals remains unknown. This study aimed to elucidate the colonoscopy-related complication rate after a positive FIT result and compare it with the rate when colonoscopy was performed for other purposes.

METHODS

Information regarding colonoscopy-related severe complications after a positive FIT result (FIT-colonoscopy) and ordinary colonoscopy during 2010-2014 was collected from the Taiwanese Colorectal Cancer Screening Program Database and National Health Insurance Research Database. Severe complications included significant bleeding, perforation, and cardiopulmonary events ≤ 14 days after colonoscopy. The number of events per 1000 procedures was used to quantify complication rates. Multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the association of various factors with severe complications associated with FIT-colonoscopy compared with ordinary colonoscopy.

RESULTS

319 114 FIT-colonoscopies (214 955 patients) were identified, 51 242 (16.1 %) of which included biopsy and 94 172 (29.5 %) included polypectomy. Overall, 2125 significant bleedings (6.7 ‰) and 277 perforations (0.9 ‰) occurred ≤ 14 days after FIT-colonoscopy. Polypectomy, antiplatelet use, and anticoagulant use were associated with higher risk of complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.41, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 4.05-4.81); aOR 1.35, 95 %CI 1.12-1.53; aOR 1.88, 95 %CI 0.61-5.84, respectively). Compared with ordinary colonoscopy, FIT-colonoscopy involved significantly higher risk of significant bleeding (aOR 3.10, 95 %CI 2.90-3.32).

CONCLUSIONS

FIT-colonoscopy was associated with a more than two-fold risk of significant bleeding, especially when polypectomy was performed.

Safety of cold snare polypectomy with periprocedural antithrombotic agents for colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal polyps in patients administered periprocedural antithrombotic agents.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through June 2021. The primary outcomes were the rates of delayed and immediate bleeding (requiring endoscopic hemostasis). Secondary outcomes included thromboembolic events. Meta-analysis using odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was performed to compare the outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies, including five randomized trials, were included. Over 96% of polyps were ⩽1 cm. The pooled rates of delayed and immediate bleeding for patients receiving CSP and periprocedural antithrombotic agents were 1.6% and 10.5%, respectively. Both the delayed (OR = 4.02, 95% CI = 1.98-8.17) and immediate bleeding (OR = 5.85, 95% CI = 3.84-8.89) rates were significantly higher in patients using periprocedural antithrombotic agents than in non-users. Although both antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants increased the risk of delayed bleeding, the risks associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; 2.5%) or multiple agents (3.9%) were particularly high. Compared to their counterparts, diminutive polyps and uncomplicated lesions not requiring hemoclipping were associated with lower risks of delayed bleeding (pooled estimates of 0.4% and 0.18%, respectively). Thromboembolic risk was similar among patients using and not using periprocedural antithrombotic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

CSP with periprocedural antiplatelet agents and warfarin may be feasible, especially for diminutive polyps. However, drug discontinuation should be considered with the use of DOACs or multiple agents which entail higher bleeding risk even with hemoclipping.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cold Snare Polypectomy Technique: Technique Matters More Than Snare Wire Diameter

INTRODUCTION

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is safe and effective for the removal of small adenomas (≤10 mm); however, reported incomplete resection rates (IRRs) vary. The optimal CSP technique, where a wide margin of normal tissue is resected around the target lesion, and snare design have both been hypothesized to reduce the IRR after CSP. We sought to investigate the efficacy of a thin-wire versus thick-wire diameter snare on IRR, using the standardized CSP technique.

METHODS

This was an international multicenter parallel design randomized trial with 17 endoscopists of varying experience (NCT02581254). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the use of a thin-wire (0.30 mm) or thick-wire (0.47 mm) snare for CSP of small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps. The primary end point was the IRR as determined by the histologic assessment of the defect margin after polypectomy.

RESULTS

Over 52 months to January 2020, 1,393 patients were eligible. A total of 660 patients with polyps (57.4% male) were randomized to a thin-wire (n = 339) or thick-wire (n = 321) snare. The overall IRR of the cohort was 1.5%. There was no significant difference in the IRR between the thin- and thick-wire arms; relative risk-0.41, 95% CI (0.11-1.56), P = 0.21. No significant differences were observed in the rate of adverse events.

DISCUSSION

In this multicenter randomized trial, CSP is safe and effective with very low rates of incomplete resection independent of the diameter of the snare wire used. This suggests that the optimal operator technique is more important than the snare design alone in minimizing residual adenoma after CSP.

Endoscopic polypectomy devices

Video 1Use of submucosal injection prior to en-bloc endoscopic mucosal resection.Video 2Use of a detachable loop ligating device prior to hot snare resection of a pedunculated polyp.

Cold or Hot Snare with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for 6-9 mm Colorectal Polyps: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR) for colorectal polyps with diameters of 6-9 mm. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 485 patients with colorectal polyps (6-9 mm in size) who were treated with CS-EMR or HS-EMR in the endoscopy center of Hangzhou Third People's Hospital from January 2017 to December 2019. Colorectal polyps were lifted by submucosal injection of normal saline. The CS-EMR group used a cold snare to remove the lifting polyps, while the HS-EMR group used a hot snare. Propensity score matching analysis with 1:1 matching and the nearest neighbor matching method were performed to ensure well-balanced characteristics of the CS-EMR and HS-EMR groups. Matching factors included age, gender, body mass index, blood routine, coagulation indicators, polyp site, size, number, and morphology. This resulted in a balanced cohort of 128 patients per group. Polyp recovery, complications, clipping for disclosure, and length of hospital stay were compared after matching. t-Tests, χ² tests, McNemar's tests, and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison between the two groups before and after matching. Results: There were no differences between the two groups of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding (P > .05), but the CS-EMR clipping rate was lower than the HS-EMR group (P < .01). There was a higher incidence of post-polypectomy syndrome (PPS) (P = .03) and longer hospital stays (P < .01) in the HS-EMR group than the CS-EMR group. Conclusions: Compared with HS-EMR, CS-EMR is more convenient to operate, with a low incidence of PPS, clipping rates, and short hospital stays. It is a safe and effective removal method for 6-9 mm colorectal polyps.

Development of a definition and rules for causal attribution of post-colonoscopy bleeding

Background

Post-colonoscopy bleeding (PCB) is an important colonoscopy quality indicator that is recommended to be routinely collected by colorectal cancer screening programs and endoscopy quality improvement programs. We created a standardized and reliable definition of PCB and set of rules for attributing the relatedness of PCB to a colonoscopy.

Methods

PCB events were identified from colonoscopies performed at the Forzani & MacPhail Colon Cancer Screening Centre. Existing definitions and relatedness rules for PCB were reviewed by the authors and a draft definition and set of rules was created. The definition and rules were revised after initial testing was performed using a set of 15 bleeding events. Information available for each event included the original endoscopy report and data abstracted from the emergency or inpatient record by a trained research assistant. A validation set of 32 bleeding events were then reviewed to assess their interrater reliability by having three endoscopists and one research assistant complete independent reviews and three endoscopists complete a consensus review. The Kappa statistic was used to measure interrater reliability.

Results

The panel classified 28 of 32 events as meeting the definition of PCB and rated 7, 8 and 6 events as definitely, probably and possibly related to the colonoscopy, respectively. The Kappa for the definition of PCB for the three independent reviews was 0.82 (substantial agreement). The Kappa for the attribution of the PCB to the colonoscopy by the three endosocopists was 0.74 (substantial agreement). The research assistant had a high agreement with the panel for both the definition (100% agreement) and application of the causal criteria (kappa 0.95).

Conclusions

A standardized definition of PCB and attribution rules achieved high interrater reliability by endoscopists and a non-endoscopist and provides a template of required data for event adjudication by screening and quality improvement programs.

Prophylactic Endoscopic Clipping Does Not Prevent Delayed Postpolypectomy Bleeding in Routine Clinical Practice: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a relatively common adverse event. Evidence is conflicting on the efficacy of prophylactic clipping to prevent DPPB, and real-world effectiveness data are lacking. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing DPPB in a large screening-related cohort.

METHODS

We manually reviewed records of patients who underwent polypectomy from 2008 to 2014 at a screening facility. Endoscopist-, patient- and polyp-related data were collected. The primary outcome was DPPB within 30 days. All unplanned healthcare visits were reviewed; DPPB cases were adjudicated by committee using a criterion-based lexicon. Multivariable logistic regression was performed, yielding adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for the association between clipping and DPPB. Secondary analyses were performed on procedures where one polyp was removed, in addition to propensity score-matched and subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 8,366 colonoscopies involving polypectomy were analyzed, yielding 95 DPPB events. Prophylactic clipping was not associated with reduced DPPB (AOR 1.27; 0.83-1.96). These findings were similar in the single-polyp cohort (n = 3,369, AOR 1.07; 0.50-2.31). In patients with one proximal polyp ≥20 mm removed, there was a nonsignificant AOR with clipping of 0.55 (0.10-2.66). Clipping was not associated with a protective benefit in the propensity score-matched or other subgroup analyses.

DISCUSSION

In this large cohort study, prophylactic clipping was not associated with lower DPPB rates. Endoscopists should not routinely use prophylactic clipping in most patients. Additional effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies are required in patients with proximal lesions ≥20 mm, in whom there may be a role for prophylactic clipping.