Delayed hemorrhage after cold and hot snare resection of colorectal polyps: a multicenter randomized trial (interim analysis)

Cold Versus Hot Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic polypectomy is an excellent tool for colon cancer prevention. With the innovation of novel resection techniques, the best method is still being investigated. Hence, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) versus hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for colorectal polyp resection.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, WOS, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL until July 16, 2022. We pooled dichotomous outcomes using risk ratio (RR) with the corresponding CI. This review's protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022347496.

RESULTS

We included 18 randomized controlled trials with a total of 4317 patients and 7509 polyps. Pooled RR favored HSP regarding the complete resection rate (RR: 0.96 with 95% CI: 0.95, 1, P = 0.03) and local recurrence incidence (RR: 5.74 with 95% CI: 1.27, 25.8, P = 0.02). Pooled RR favored CSP regarding the colonoscopy time (mean difference: -6.50 with 95% CI: -7.55, -5.44, P = 0.00001) and polypectomy time (mean difference: -57.36 with 95% CI: -81.74, -32.98, P = 0.00001). There was no difference regarding the incidence of immediate bleeding ( P = 0.06) and perforation ( P = 0.39); however, HSP was associated with more incidence of delayed bleeding ( P = 0.01), abdominal pain ( P = 0.007), and postresection syndrome ( P = 0.02).

DISCUSSION

HSP is associated with a higher complete resection and lower recurrence rates; however, HSP is also associated with a higher incidence of adverse events. Therefore, improving the complete resection rate with CSP still warrants more innovation, giving the technique safety and shorter procedure duration.

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.

Submucosal Injection Using Epinephrine-Added Saline in Cold Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps Shortens Time Required for Resection: A Randomized Controlled Study

AIMS

Immediate bleeding after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal polyps might interfere with confirmation of residuals and prolong the time required for resection. We investigated whether submucosal epinephrine-added saline injection reduces the time required for the CSP procedure.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial (clinical trial registration number: UMIN000046770). Patients with colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm were randomly allocated to either CSP with epinephrine-added submucosal injection (CEMR group) or conventional CSP (CSP group). The primary outcome was the time required for resection defined as the time from the initiation of resection (the first insertion of the snare in the CSP group or the injection needle in the CEMR group) to the end of resection (confirming complete resection endoscopically after recognizing the cessation of immediate bleeding) in each lesion, and the secondary outcome was the time to spontaneous cessation of immediate bleeding after resection defined as the time from ensnaring the lesion to confirming the spontaneous cessation of immediate bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were randomly assigned. Finally, 261 lesions in 118 patients (CEMR group, n = 59; CSP group, n = 59) were analyzed. The time required for resection calculated using the least-square mean was significantly shorter in the CEMR group (106.3 s, 95% CI 97.5 to 115.4 s) than in the CSP group (130.9 s, 95% CI 121.2 to 140.7 s) (P < 0.001). The time to spontaneous cessation of immediate bleeding was also significantly shorter in the CEMR group (20.4 s, 95% CI 14.3 to 26.5 s) than in the CSP group (74.2 s, 95% CI 67.6 to 80.7 s) (P < 0.001). Neither group had cases requiring hemostasis, perforation, or delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

CEMR shortened the time for resection by shortening the time to cessation of immediate bleeding compared with conventional CSP in colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm.

Different endoscopic treatments for small colorectal polyps: A systematic review, pair-wise, and network meta-analysis

Background and study aims

In recent years, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been increasingly used for small polyps (<10 mm) instead of hot snare polypectomy (HSP). However, evidence-based research regarding the effectiveness and safety of CSP and HSP are still lacking. Additionally, for 4-10 -mm non-pedunculated polyps, the polyp removal method is still controversial. Therefore, it is clinically significant to conduct pair-wise and network meta-analyses to assess such resection methods.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Only studies that involved the resection of polyps <10 mm were included. Outcomes included the complete resection rate, polyp retrieval rate, procedure-related complications, and procedure times.

Results

Overall, 23 RCTs (5,352 patients) were identified. In meta-analysis compared CSP versus HSP for polyps <10 mm, CSP showed lower complete resection rate than HSP although with no statistically significant difference [odds ratio (OR): 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-1.06]. CSP showed a lower risk of major post-polypectomy complications compared to HSP (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.11-0.73). In the network meta-analysis for 4-10 mm non-pedunculated polyps, HSP, and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) showed a higher complete resection rate than CSP (OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.3-9.2 vs. OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.0-10) but a significantly longer time than CSP (WMD: 16.55 s, 95% CI [7.48 s, 25.25 s], p < 0.001), (WMD: 48.00 s, 95% CI [16.54 s, 79.46 s], p = 0.003). Underwater CSP ranked third for complete resection with no complications.

Conclusion

For <10 mm polyps, CSP is safer than HSP, especially for patients taking antithrombotic drugs. For 4-10 mm non-pedunculated polyps, HSP, and EMR have higher complete resection rates than CSP.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022315575.

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Role of Clips in Preventing Delayed Bleeding After Colorectal Polyp Resection: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

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.).

Efficacy and safety of cold versus hot snare polypectomy for small (5-9 mm) colorectal polyps: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Resection techniques for small polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). This study compared CSP and HSP in 5-9 mm polyps in terms of complete resection and adverse events.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted in seven Spanish centers between February and November 2019. Patients with ≥ 1 5-9 mm polyp were randomized to CSP or HSP, regardless of morphology or pit pattern. After polypectomy, two marginal biopsies were submitted to a pathologist who was blinded to polyp histology. Complete resection was defined as normal mucosa or burn artifacts in the biopsies. Abdominal pain was only assessed in patients without < 5 mm or > 9 mm polyps.

RESULTS

496 patients were randomized: 237 (394 polyps) to CSP and 259 (397 polyps) to HSP. Complete polypectomy rates were 92.5 % with CSP and 94.0 % with HSP (difference 1.5 %, 95 % confidence interval -1.9 % to 4.9 %). Intraprocedural bleeding occurred during three CSPs (0.8 %) and seven HSPs (1.8 %) (P = 0.34). One lesion per group (0.4 %) presented delayed hemorrhage. Post-colonoscopy abdominal pain presented similarly in both groups 1 hour after the procedure (CSP 18.8 % vs. HSP 18.4 %) but was higher in the HSP group after 5 hours (5.9 % vs. 16.5 %; P = 0.02). A higher proportion of patients were asymptomatic 24 hours after CSP than after HSP (97 % vs. 86.4 %; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no differences in complete resection and bleeding rates between CSP and HSP. CSP reduced the intensity and duration of post-colonoscopy abdominal pain.

Safety and efficacy of cold versus hot snare polypectomy including colorectal polyps ≥1 cm in size

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP; polypectomy without electrocautery) has spread rapidly worldwide during the past decade in what has been called "Cold Revolution". We performed a PubMed literature search for studies investigating CSP outcomes for colorectal polyps. Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the complete resection rates (CRRs). The CRRs were similar regardless of the presence or absence of electrocautery, and the efficacy of submucosal injection for better CRRs is still controversial. Eight RCTs assessed the adverse events. The incidence of intraprocedural bleeding with cold procedures was comparable to or higher than that of hot procedures. The incidences of delayed bleeding were comparable to or lower with cold procedures, especially in patients taking anticoagulants. Fifteen studies have been reported on CSP for large (≥1 cm) colorectal polyps (10 retrospective studies, four prospective single-arm studies, and one prospective RCT). These studies reported that the safe cold procedures (a low intra- and post-procedural bleeding rate without perforation) could be implemented for lesions ≥1 cm. However, considering the incision depth of CSP and the local recurrence rate based on the current evidence, only large sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) can be candidates for cold procedures, and large adenomas should not be candidates for this procedure. Based on the current evidence, CSP seems to be the appropriate standard procedure for sub-centimeter colorectal low-grade adenomas due to its safety and simplicity. Thus, large SSLs can be candidates for cold procedures; however, careful inspection and further prospective studies are warranted to confirm the procedure's clinical relevance.

Risk factors for post-polypectomy bleeding; a retrospective case-control study of a high-volume colonoscopy center

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) remains an uncommon although serious complication of colonoscopy. The aim of this study is to determine the PPB-prevalence in a secondary care hospital and its associated risk factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected data from 581 patients, with the removal of 1593 polyps between August 2017 and August 2019. A univariate binary logistic regression analysis was conducted retrospectively.

RESULTS

PPB occurred in only 10 cases, representing 1.7% of patients: immediate in 1.2% and delayed in 0.5%. The number of removed polyps per patient [4.5 (SD 2.59) for hemorrhagic vs. 2.74 (SD 1.98) for non-hemorrhagic group] and the propofol dose [232 mg (SD 93.07) for hemorrhagic vs. 133 mg (SD 57.28) for non-hemorrhagic group] were relevant patient-related risk factors. The polyp-based analysis showed the polyp size [18.4 mm (SD 10.44) for hemorrhagic vs. 4.42 mm (SD 4.29) for non-hemorrhagic group], the morphology [wide-based: OR 24.83 (95 % CI 2.76 - 223.44), pedunculated: OR 56.67 (95 % CI 5.03 - 638.29)], the location at ileocecal valve [OR 20.48, 95 % CI 1.81 - 231.97)], and the polypectomy method [hot snare piecemeal with epinephrine injection: OR 75.38 (95 % CI 7.67 - 741.21)] as significant risk factors for PPB, too.

CONCLUSIONS

The low rate of PPB confirms the safety of the procedure in non-tertiary, high-volume colonoscopy centers. The number of polyps removed per patient, the polyp size, morphology and location, as well as the sedation dose and the method of polypectomy were shown as relevant risk factors.

Efficacy of cold endoscopic mucosal resection vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection in treatment of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 5-10 mm

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been gradually applied to remove small colorectal polyps (6-9 mm). Cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is based on CSP technology combined with submucosal injection of water. Studies have reported that the histological complete resection rate of cold EMR of 6-9 mm colorectal adenoma is significantly better than that of CSP. However, there are few studies on the efficacy of cold EMR vs conventional EMR.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of cold EMR and conventional EMR for 5-10 mm colorectal adenomas.

METHODS

From August 2019 to December 2020, consecutive hospitalized patients who underwent colorectal polypectomy at the Digestive Endoscopy Center of our hospital were screened for eligible polyps. Eligible polyps were randomized to be treated with either cold EMR or conventional EMR according to a random number table (1:1). The histological complete resection rate, immediate postpolypectomy bleeding, and delayed postpolypectomy bleeding were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-one patients with 195 eligible polyps were included, including 90 patients with 98 polyps in the cold EMR group and 91 patients with 97 polyps in the conventional EMR group. The en bloc resection rate of polyps in the overall population was 98.5%, and there was no perforation. The overall rate of histological complete resection was 91.8% in the cold EMR group and 95.9% in the EMR group (difference: 4.1%; 95%CI: -3.9-12.3). Subgroup analysis by polyp size showed that the histological complete resection rates were 94.6% and 100% for 5-7 mm polyps (difference: 5.4%; 95%CI: -8.3-19.5), and 90.2% and 93.8% for 8-10 mm polyps (difference: 3.6%; 95%CI: -7.8-15.4). The immediate postpolypectomy bleeding rates of the cold EMR and conventional EMR groups were 2.0% and 1.0%, and the delayed postpolypectomy bleeding rates were 0% and 1%, respectively; there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Cold EMR is a safe and effective treatment for 5-10 mm colorectal adenoma, with a histological complete resection rate not inferior to that of conventional endoscopic mucosal resection.