Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Cascade Guideline

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.

Risk factors and prediction model for delayed bleeding after cold snare polypectomy: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding (DB) is a serious complication after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for polyps in the colon. The present study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors of DB after CSP and to develop a risk-scoring model for predicting DB.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in four Chinese medical institutions. 10650 patients underwent CSP from June 2019 to May 2023. The study analyzed the rate of DB and extracted the general clinical information and polyp-related information of patients with postoperative DB. As a control, non-DB patients who received CSP at the same 4 hospitals were analyzed. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to develop the prediction model. The model was further validated using a Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis, receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) plot and risk plot.

RESULTS

In our study, we found a 0.24% rate of DB and the risk factors were history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, antithrombotics use, antiplatelet use, anticoagulant use, abdominal operation, sigmoid colon lesion, hematoma, cold snare defect protrusion, polyp size, wound size, the grade of wound bleeding, and morphology of Ip. These factors were incorporated into the prediction model for DB after CSP. For 1, 3, and 5 days of bleeding, the AUC of the ROC curve was 0.912, 0.939, and 0.923, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that the high-risk group had a significantly higher risk of DB than the low-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study screened the risk factors and established a prediction model of DB after CSP. The results may help preventing and reducing the DB rate after CSP of colorectal polyps.

Innovative submucosal injection solution for endoscopic resection with phosphorylated pullulan: a preclinical study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A submucosal injection solution is used to assist in endoscopic surgery. The high viscosity of current solutions makes them difficult to inject. In the present study, we developed an extremely low-viscosity, easy-to-use submucosal injection solution using phosphorylated pullulan (PPL).

METHODS

The PPL solutions were prepared at different concentrations, and their viscosities were measured. The mucosal elevation capacity was evaluated using excised porcine stomachs. Controls included 0.4% sodium hyaluronate (SH), 0.6% sodium alginate (SA), and saline. To evaluate the practicality, the catheter injectability of 0.7% PPL was measured, and EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) were performed using the stomach and colorectum of live pigs. As controls, 0.4% SH and saline were used.

RESULTS

The PPL solutions were of extremely low viscosity compared to the solutions of 0.4% SH and 0.6% SA. Nevertheless, the mucosal elevation capacity of PPL solutions for up to 0.7% concentration was similar to that of 0.4% SH, and 0.7% PPL was less resistant to catheter infusion than 0.4% SH and 0.6% SA. In live pig experiments with endoscopic mucosal resection and ESD, snaring after submucosal injection of 0.7% PPL was easier than with 0.4% SH, ESD with 0.7% PPL produced less bubble formation than with 0.4% SH, and the procedure time tended to be shorter with 0.7% PPL than with 0.4% SH because of the shorter injection time.

CONCLUSIONS

The PPL solution is an innovative and easy-to-use submucosal injection solution.

Cold EMR vs. Hot EMR for the removal of sessile serrated polyps larger than 10 mm: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) appears to be a promising technique for the removal of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥ 10 mm. To assess the effectiveness and safety of EMR for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies reporting on EMR of SSPs ≥ 10 mm, up until December 2023. Our primary endpoints of interest were rates of technical success, residual SSPs, and adverse events (AE).

RESULTS

Our search identified 426 articles, of which 14 studies with 2262 SSPs were included for analysis. The rates of technical success, AEs, and residual SSPs were 100%, 2.0%, and 3.1%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the technical success rates were the same for polyps 10-19 and 20 mm, and en-bloc and piecemeal resection. Residual SSPs rates were similar in en-bloc and piecemeal resection, but much lower in cold EMR (1.0% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.034). AEs rates were reduced in cold EMR compared to hot EMR (0% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.168), in polyps 10-19 mm compared to 20 mm (0% vs. 4.1%, P = 0.255), and in piecemeal resection compared to en-bloc (0% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.169).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR is an effective and safe technique for removing SSPs ≥ 10 mm. The therapeutic effect of cold EMR is superior to that of hot EMR, with a lower incidence of adverse effects.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023388959.

Efficacy and Safety of Cold Snare Polypectomy versus Cold Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Resecting 3-10 mm Colorectal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The safety and efficacy of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) compared to those of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) have been reported. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of CEMR and CSP.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of CEMR and CSP in removing 3-10 mm polyps. The outcomes assessed included complete resection rate, intraoperative bleeding rate, delayed bleeding rate, perforation, and polyp removal time. The results are reported as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven studies comprising 1,911 polyps were included in the analysis. The complete resection rate of CEMR was comparable to that of CSP (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99-1.04, p = 0.32). Comparable results were also demonstrated for intraoperative bleeding rate (polyp-based analysis: RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.33-4.43, p = 0.77), delayed bleeding rate (polyp-based analysis: RR: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.44-4.15, p = 0.61), and polyp removal time (mean difference: 28.31 s, 95% CI: -21.40-78.02, p = 0.26). No studies reported cases of perforation.

CONCLUSION

CEMR has comparable efficacy and safety to CSP in removing 3-10 mm polyps. Further randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are warranted to compare and validate efficacy.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review and summarize the most recent literature, including evidence-based guidelines, on the evaluation and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB).

RECENT FINDINGS

LGIB primarily presents in the elderly, often on the background of comorbidities, and constitutes a significant healthcare and economic burden worldwide. Therefore, acute LGIB requires rapid evaluation, informed decision-making, and evidence-based management decisions. LGIB management involves withholding and possibly reversing precipitating medications and concurrently addressing risk factors, with definitive diagnosis and therapy for the source of bleeding usually performed by endoscopic or radiological means. Recent advancements in LGIB diagnosis and management, including risk stratification tools and novel endoscopic therapeutic techniques have improved LGIB management and patient outcomes. In recent years, the various society guidelines on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding have been revised and updated accordingly.

SUMMARY

By integrating the most recently published high-quality clinical studies and society guidelines, we provide clinicians with an up-to-date and comprehensive overview on acute LGIB diagnosis and management.

Optimization of colonoscopy quality: Comprehensive review of the literature and future perspectives

Colonoscopy is crucial in preventing colorectal cancer (CRC) and reducing associated mortality. This comprehensive review examines the importance of high-quality colonoscopy and associated quality indicators, including bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, adenoma detection rate (ADR), complete resection, specimen retrieval, complication rates, and patient satisfaction, while also discussing other ADR-related metrics. Additionally, the review draws attention to often overlooked quality aspects, such as nonpolypoid lesion detection, as well as insertion and withdrawal skills. Moreover, it explores the potential of artificial intelligence in enhancing colonoscopy quality and highlights specific considerations for organized screening programs. The review also emphasizes the implications of organized screening programs and the need for continuous quality improvement. A high-quality colonoscopy is crucial for preventing postcolonoscopy CRC- and CRC-related deaths. Health-care professionals must develop a thorough understanding of colonoscopy quality components, including technical quality, patient safety, and patient experience. By prioritizing ongoing evaluation and refinement of these quality indicators, health-care providers can contribute to improved patient outcomes and develop more effective CRC screening programs.