Diminutive colorectal polyp resection comparing hot and cold snare and cold biopsy forceps polypectomy. Results of a pilot randomized, single-center study (with videos)

Cold snare polypectomy compared to cold forceps polypectomy for endoscopic resection of guideline defined diminutive polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for polyps  < 10 mm in size. However, recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) showed conflicting results for the use of cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) vs. CSP for the resection of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs) (≤ 5 mm), especially for polyps  ≤ 3 mm. Herein we compared CFP with CSP for patients with DCPs in this meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception to November 24, 2022, (Registration number INPLASY2022110135). The primary endpoint was DCP complete resection rate. The secondary endpoints were mean polypectomy time, polyp retrieval rate and complications.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs involving 1023 DCPs were included. The complete resection rate (91.6% vs. 94.7%) for CFP was not significantly lower for polyps ≤ 5 mm (relative risk [RR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.07). Sub-group analysis showed that the complete resection rate (88.7% vs. 92.4%) for CFP was not significantly lower for DCPs > 3 mm (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.97-1.12). Another sub-group analysis showed that the complete resection rate (97.0% vs. 96.3%) was similar for polyps ≤ 3 mm for CFP vs. CSP (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.98-1.03). The mean polypectomy time was not different between CFP and CSP (95% CI: -11.86-10.18). The polyp retrieval rate (100% vs. 96.9%) was not significantly higher for CFP (RR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.98-1.07). There were no reported complications in the included studies. The overall study quality was moderate except for the removal of polyps ≤ 5 mm (low-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

CFP was comparable to CSP for the resection of polyps ≤ 3 mm; however, caution should be taken for DCPs > 3 mm because of the low complete resection rate (< 90%).

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.

Real-world local recurrence rate after cold polypectomy in colorectal polyps less than 10 mm using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Cold polypectomy (CP) is a simple and safe procedure for polyps less than 10 mm in size; however, there is concern about local recurrence following CP because of unidentified margins of excised specimens and the lack of tumor suppression effect by coagulation. Some clinical trials have evaluated local persistent recurrence; their results suggest that a higher rate of local recurrence has not been documented so far. There were few reports that observed the course over long periods of time after CP in clinical practice.

AIM

To evaluate the presence of local recurrence following CP and hot polypectomy (HP) using propensity score matching.

METHODS

We analyzed 275 patients who underwent polypectomy for non-pedunculated colorectal polyps less than 10 mm (959 Lesions) between October 2016 and 2017 and underwent follow-up endoscopy subsequently. We divided them into the CP group (706 Lesions), wherein CP was performed, and the HP group (253 Lesions), wherein HP was performed. Using propensity score matching, we extracted 215 Lesions in each group and evaluated the local recurrence and content of CP in the real clinic and adverse events using medical records.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences in the patients’ and their endoscopic background (age, use of antithrombotics, indications, size, morphology, location of polyps, and polypectomy device) between the groups. The mean duration between colorectal polypectomy and the next follow-up colonoscopy was 17.5 ± 7.1 (range, 6-39) mo in the CP group and 15.7 ± 6.0 (range, 6-35) mo in the HP group, which was significantly longer in the CP group (P = 0.005). The local recurrence rate was 0.93% in the CP group and 0.93% in the HP group, without a significant difference (P = 0.688). Additionally, no differences were observed in the macroscopic en bloc resection rate, histopathological complete resection rate, and pathological results between the groups. Adverse events did not occur in either group.

CONCLUSION

Local recurrence after CP was equivalent to that following HP in clinical practice. CP is useful and safe in the treatment of non-pedunculated polyps of less than 10 mm.

Anticoagulation and antiplatelet management in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A review of current evidence

The role of endoscopic procedures, in both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes is continually expanding and evolving rapidly. In this context, endoscopists will encounter patients prescribed on anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications frequently. This poses an increased risk of intraprocedural and delayed gastrointestinal bleeding. Thus, there is now greater importance on optimal pre, peri and post-operative management of anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of post-procedural bleeding, without increasing the risk of a thromboembolic event as a consequence of therapy interruption. Currently, there are position statements and guidelines from the major gastroenterology societies. These are available to assist endoscopists with an evidenced-based systematic approach to anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet management in endoscopic procedures, to ensure optimal patient safety. However, since the publication of these guidelines, there is emerging evidence not previously considered in the recommendations that may warrant changes to our current clinical practices. Most notably and divergent from current position statements, is a growing concern regarding the use of heparin bridging therapy during warfarin cessation and its associated risk of increased bleeding, suggestive that this practice should be avoided. In addition, there is emerging evidence that anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy may be safe to be continued in cold snare polypectomy for small polyps (< 10 mm).

Indications for Cold Polypectomy Stratified by the Colorectal Polyp Size: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives:

Cold polypectomy (CP) is widely used because of its safety profile. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to clarify the indications for CP based on polyp size.

Methods:

We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials that compared cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and other procedures for polyps ≤10 mm. Large-scale prospective observational studies were also searched to assess delayed bleeding rates. The studies were integrated to assess the risk ratio for incomplete resection rates according to polyp size. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the study bias. The certainty of cumulative evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

Results:

We found 280 articles and reviewed their eligibility. We selected and extracted 12 randomized controlled trials and 3 prospective observational studies. The risk ratio of incomplete resection of polyps ≤10 mm using CSP compared with hot snare polypectomy (HSP) was 1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-2.01). The risk ratio for incomplete removal using CSP compared with cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.31-0.82). For polyps ≤3 mm, the risk ratio of CSP compared with CFP was 1.40 (95% CI, 0.39-4.95). Certainty of cumulative evidence was considered low. No delayed bleeding after CP was reported after the treatment of 3446 polyps.

Conclusions:

CSP and HSP may result in the same complete resection rates for polyps ≤10 mm. For polyps ≤3 mm, CFP and CSP may have the same resection rates (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019122132).

Dye-based chromoendoscopy following polypectomy reduces incomplete polyp resection

Background and study aims  The completeness of a polyp resection is an important determinant of quality in colonoscopy, and may reduce incidence of interval cancers. Incomplete resection rates (IRR) vary widely and range from 6.5 % to 22.7 %. Residual disease is more likely with larger polyps, for sessile serrated adenomas, and with more proximal lesions. Chromoendoscopy is increasingly employed in lesion detection. The aims of this study were to assess local IRR, and to determine whether chromoendoscopy could correctly identify residual disease post polypectomy. Patients and methods  This was a prospective study examining post polypectomy sites. Chromoendoscopy (0.13 % indigo carmine) was applied to resection bases to identify residual disease. Targeted base biopsies were taken from identified residual disease (positive group) or random base biopsies were taken when a clear base was visualised (negative group). Overall rates of incomplete resection were documented. Reported rates post chromoendoscopy and actual histological rates were documented and compared. Results  A total of 102 polyps were identified for inclusion, of which 15 % (n = 16) were excluded. Resection quality was evaluated in 86 polyps of 61 patients (female n = 33 54 %; mean Age 62.3 years). Polyps were mainly removed by cold snare (n = 71, 82.5 %). Most polyps (n = 58, 67 %) measured between 5 to 10 mm. Polyps were largely located in the right colon (n = 57, 66 %). Overall histological residual disease occurred in 17 /86 (19.6 %). Chromoendoscopy correctly identified residual disease in 13 of 17 bases (76.5 %). Only four of /86 (4.6 %) of polyp bases were missclassified post-chromoendoscopy (odds ratio 0.284 (95 % CI 0.0857-0.9409), P  = 0.03). Conclusion  Indigo carmine chromoendoscopy improves early detection of residual disease post polypectomy, reducing incomplete resection rates.

Underwater polypectomy without submucosal injection for colorectal lesions ≤ 20 mm in size-a multicenter retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Underwater polypectomy (UWP) of large (≥ 20 mm) colorectal lesions is well described, but reports of UWP for lesions ≤ 20 mm in size, which account for > 95% of polyps encountered in routine clinical practice, are limited. We assessed the feasibility of UWP in routine practice across various sites for colorectal lesions ≤ 20 mm in size.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was performed on pooled data from nine colonoscopists at 3 U.S., 1 Taiwanese and 2 Italian sites. Outcomes related to UWP on lesions ≤ 20 mm in size were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 117 patients, UWP netted 169 lesions. Polypectomy by hot (HSP, 54%) or cold (CSP, 41%) snare, and cold forceps (CFP, 5%) were performed successfully without endoscopic evidence of residual neoplasia or immediate clinically significant adverse events. The majority (74.6%) were tubular adenomas; 60.9% were from the proximal colon. Histopathologic margins were positive in 4 and unavailable in 26 CSP and 24 HSP specimens. The remainder had negative resection margins on pathologic reports.

CONCLUSION

UWP for colorectal lesions ≤ 20 mm in routine practice across multiple sites confirms the feasibility and acceptability of this technique. Improvement of resection outcomes by UWP in routine practice deserves further evaluation in a randomized controlled trial.

Hot snare vs. cold snare polypectomy for endoscopic removal of 4 - 10 mm colorectal polyps during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Introduction  In recent years, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has increasingly been used over hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for the removal of colorectal polyps (4 - 10 mm in size). However, the optimal technique (CSP vs. HSP), in terms of complete polyp resection and complications, is uncertain. Our aim was to compare incomplete resection rate (IRR) of polyps and complications using CSP vs. HSP. Methods  Randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing CSP and HSP for removal of 4 - 10 mm colorectal polyps were considered. Studies were included in the analysis if they obtained biopsy specimens from the resection margin to confirm the absence of residual tissue and reported complications. IRR and complication rate were the outcome measures. Pooled rates were reported as Odds Ratios (OR) or risk difference with 95 % Confidence Interval (CI). Results  In total, three RCTs were included in the final analysis. A total of 1051 patients with 1485 polyps were randomized to either HSP group (n = 741 polyps) or CSP group (n = 744 polyps). The overall IRR did not differ between the two groups (HSP vs. CSP: 2.4 % vs. 4.7 %; OR 0.51, 95 %CI 0.13 - 1.99, P  = 0.33, I 2  = 73 %). The HSP group had a lower rate of overall complications compared to the CSP group (3.7 % vs. 6.6 %; OR 0.53, 95 % CI 0.3 - 0.94, P  = 0.03, I 2  = 0 %). Polyp retrieval rates were not different between the two groups (99 % vs. 98.1 %). Conclusion  Our results suggest that HSP and CSP techniques can be effectively used for the complete removal of 4 - 10 mm colorectal polyps; however, HSP has a lower incidence of overall complications.

BEST POLYPECTOMY TECHNIQUE FOR SMALL AND DIMINUTIVE COLORECTAL POLYPS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Polypectomy of colorectal polyps is the mainstay of colorectal cancer prevention. Identification of the best polypectomy technique is imperative.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims at comparing efficacy of nine different resection methods for small colorectal polyps (<10 mm).

METHODS

We searched and selected only randomized controlled trials. Primary outcome was complete resection rates of small polyps by histological eradication. Secondary outcomes were: adverse events, retrieval tissue failures rates and duration of procedure.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials including 3215 patients and 5223 polyps were analysed. Overall, cold polypectomy had a significantly shorter time of procedure than hot polypectomy (RD -5.92, 95%CI -9.90 to -1.94, P<0.05), with no statistical difference on complete histological eradication (RD 0.08, 95%CI -0.03 to 0.19, P>0.05). Regarding cold polypectomy techniques, cold snare was found superior to cold forceps on complete and en-bloc resection rates and less time consuming. When comparing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with hot-snare and cold-snare, the latter showed no-inferiority on histological eradication, adverse events or retrieval tissue failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Cold polypectomy is the best technique for resection of small colorectal polyps. Among cold methods, dedicated cold snare was found superior on histological eradication. Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection might be considered an option for polyps from 5 to 9 mm.

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

Background and study aims  Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is considered to be effective in reducing risk of delayed bleeding but randomized trials fail to support this owing to the small sample size. The current study aimed to compare risk of delayed bleeding before and after implementation of CSP in a screening colonoscopy setting. Patients and methods  This study retrospectively analyzed a prospectively maintained screening colonoscopy database in a university hospital in Taiwan. We compared the rate of delayed bleeding before and after implementation within similar periods (18 months and 15 months) and the respective number of polypectomies (1,304 and 1,255) performed to remove small and diminutive polyps. The main outcome measurement was delayed bleeding within the two periods. Multivariate analysis was performed to adjust for major confounders. Results  A total of 1,304 and 1,225 subjects received hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and CSP in two separate periods, respectively. Compared with the HSP, the CSP had a lower rate of delayed bleeding (0.1 % vs . 1.1 %, P  < 0.001), severe bleeding (0 % vs. 0.7 %, P  < 0.01), need for second-look colonoscopy (0 % vs. 0.8 %, P  < 0.01), and emergency service visits (0.1 % vs . 1.0 %, P  < 0.01). Total procedure time (12.60 ± 11.45 vs . 16.48 ± 14.27 min/person, P  < 0.01) and duration of hospital stay (1.18 ± 0.50 vs . 1.53 ± 5.78 hour/person, P  < 0.03) were also shorter after CSP implementation. Multivariate analysis showed that HSP was an independent risk factor for delayed bleeding after adjusting for age, gender, and number of polyps (adjusted odds ratio 14.4;95 % confidence interval = 1.88 - 110.6). Conclusion  Implementation of CSP significantly reduces risk of delayed bleeding associated with removing small and diminutive polyps in screening colonoscopy.

Efficacy and safety of cold forceps polypectomy utilizing the jumbo cup: a prospective study

Background/Aims

There are few prospective studies on cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) using jumbo cup forceps. Therefore, we examined patients with diminutive polyps (5 mm or smaller) treated with CFP using jumbo cup forceps to achieve an adenoma-free colon and also assessed the safety of the procedure and the recurrence rate of missed or residual polyp after CFP by performing follow-up colonoscopy 1 year later.

Methods

We included patients with up to 5 adenomas removed at initial colonoscopy and analyzed data from a total of 361 patients with 573 adenomas. One-year follow-up colonoscopy was performed in 165 patients, at which 251 lesions were confirmed.

Results

The one-bite resection rate with CFP was highest for lesions 3 mm or smaller and decreased significantly with increasing lesion size. Post-procedural hemorrhage was observed in 1 of 573 lesions (0.17%). No perforation was noted. The definite recurrence rate was 0.8% (2/251 lesions). The probable recurrence rate, which was defined as recurrence in the same colorectal segment, was 17%. Adenoma-free colon was achieved in 55% of patients at initial resection. Multivariate analysis revealed that achievement of an adenoma-free colon was significantly associated with number of adenomas and years of endoscopic experience.

Conclusions

CFP using jumbo biopsy forceps was safe and showed a high one-bite resection rate for diminutive lesions of 3 mm or smaller. The low definite recurrence rate confirms the reliability of CFP using jumbo biopsy forceps. Number of adenomas and years of endoscopic experience were key factors in achieving an adenoma-free colon.

A comparison of the resection rate for cold and hot snare polypectomy for 4-9 mm colorectal polyps: a multicentre randomised controlled trial (CRESCENT study)

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the success rate of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for complete resection of 4-9 mm colorectal adenomatous polyps compared with that of hot snare polypectomy (HSP).

DESIGN

A prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled, parallel, non-inferiority trial conducted in 12 Japanese endoscopy units. Endoscopically diagnosed sessile adenomatous polyps, 4-9 mm in size, were randomly assigned to the CSP or HSP group. After complete removal of the polyp using the allocated technique, biopsy specimens from the resection margin after polypectomy were obtained. The primary endpoint was the complete resection rate, defined as no evidence of adenomatous tissue in the biopsied specimens, among all pathologically confirmed adenomatous polyps.

RESULTS

A total of 796 eligible polyps were detected in 538 of 912 patients screened for eligibility between September 2015 and August 2016. The complete resection rate for CSP was 98.2% compared with 97.4% for HSP. The non-inferiority of CSP for complete resection compared with HSP was confirmed by the +0.8% (90% CI -1.0 to 2.7) complete resection rate (non-inferiority p<0.0001). Postoperative bleeding requiring endoscopic haemostasis occurred only in the HSP group (0.5%, 2 of 402 polyps).

CONCLUSIONS

The complete resection rate for CSP is not inferior to that for HSP. CSP can be one of the standard techniques for 4-9 mm colorectal polyps. (Study registration: UMIN000018328).

A prospective comparison of cold snare polypectomy using traditional or dedicated cold snares for the resection of small sessile colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 The evidence for efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the completeness of resection and safety of cold snare polypectomy, using either traditional or dedicated cold snares.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 This was a prospective, non-randomized study performed at a single tertiary hospital. Adult patients with at least one colorectal polyp (size ≤ 10 mm) removed by cold snare were included. In the first phase, all patients had polyps removed by traditional snare without diathermy. In the second phase, all patients had polyps removed by dedicated cold snare. Complete endoscopic resection was determined from histological examination of quadrantic polypectomy margin biopsies. Immediate or delayed bleeding within 2 weeks was recorded.

RESULTS

 In total, 181 patients with 299 eligible polyps (n = 93 (173 polyps) traditional snare group, n = 88 (126 polyps) dedicated cold snare group) were included. Patient demographics and procedure indications were similar between groups. Mean polyp size was 6 mm in both groups ( P  = 0.25). Complete polyp resection was 165 /173 (95.4 %; 95 %CI 90.5 - 97.6 %) in the traditional snare group and 124/126 (98.4 %; 95 %CI 93.7 - 99.6 %) in the dedicated cold snare group ( P  = 0.16). Serrated polyps, compared with adenomatous polyps, had a higher rate of incomplete resection (7 % vs. 2 %, P  = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of immediate bleeding (3 % vs. 1 %, P  = 0.41) and there were no delayed hemorrhages or perforations.

CONCLUSIONS

 Cold snare polypectomy is effective and safe for the complete endoscopic resection of small (≤ 10 mm) colorectal polyps with either traditional or dedicated cold snares.

Comparative efficacy of cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive colorectal polyps: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although cold polypectomy techniques are preferred over polypectomy with electrocautery in the management of diminutive polyps, comprehensive comparisons among various cold polypectomy techniques have not yet been fully performed.

METHODS

We searched for all relevant randomized controlled trials published up until October 2016 examining the efficacy of cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive polyps. Cold polypectomy techniques were classified as cold forceps polypectomy (CFP), jumbo forceps polypectomy (JFP), traditional cold snare polypectomy (CSP), and dedicated CSP, according to the type of device. A network meta-analysis was performed to calculate the direct and indirect estimates of efficacy among the cold polypectomy techniques.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 703 patients and 968 polyps were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding comparative efficacy for complete histological eradication, there was no inconsistency in the network (Cochran's Q test, df = 4, P = 0.22; I ² = 30%). In terms of complete histological eradication, both dedicated and traditional CSP were superior to CFP (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]] 4.31 [1.92-9.66] and 2.45 [1.30-4.63], respectively); dedicated CSP was superior to traditional CSP (OR [95% CI] 1.76 [1.07-2.89]); and there was no difference between JFP versus CFP (OR [95% CI] 1.36 [0.40-4.61]). Regarding tissue retrieval rate, there was no difference between dedicated versus traditional CSP (OR [95% CI] 1.03 [0.44-2.38]). The procedure time for CSP was comparable to that of CFP.

CONCLUSIONS

Dedicated CSP was shown to be superior to other cold polypectomy techniques in terms of complete histological eradication. Cold polypectomy using a dedicated snare can be recommended for the removal of diminutive colorectal polyps.

Efficacy and safety of cold snare resection in preventive screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

 Removal of polyps during colonoscopy effectively prevents the development of colorectal cancer. So far, snare resection with high frequency current with or without prior submucosal saline injection is the method of choice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and outcome of cold snare resection during routine endoscopy.

METHODS

 In this prospective study, 522 patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were included. Cold snare resection for diminutive (< 6 mm), small (6 - 9 mm), and larger polyps (> 9 - 15 mm) was performed using a dedicated cold snare device (Exacto ^® ) without prior submucosal injection. Outcome parameters included bleeding rate, perforation rate, procedure time, histologic evaluation of polyp margins, and success rates. The data were compared to a group of patients undergoing hot snare resection.

RESULTS

 Overall, 1233 polyps were removed using cold snare resection with an overall success rate of 99.4 %. All failures of cold snare resection occurred in the cecum (8/82, failure rate 9.8 %). In the remaining colon, the success rate was 100 %. Immediate post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 0.49 % of all patients and was most frequently seen in polyps larger than 9 mm. The procedure time was significantly shorter using cold snare resection compared with hot snare resection (27.6 min vs. 35.7 min, P  < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

 Cold snare resection can be performed safely in outpatients for removal of small polyps in screening colonoscopy. It does not require prior saline injection and reduces procedure time without an increased risk of bleeding.

Histological outcomes between hot and cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND/AIM

To compare the complete resection rate of hot and cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 233 consecutive patients with 461 colorectal polyps up to 10 mm in diameter that were treated by hot or cold snare polypectomy between April 2014 and August 2016. Lesions treated by hot snare polypectomy (n = 137) and cold snare polypectomy (n = 324) were compared. The histological complete resection rates were evaluated between the two groups. We analyzed the relationship between factors for complete resection and clinical factors using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

There was a significantly higher complete resection rate in hot snare polypectomy than in cold snare polypectomy (70.5% vs. 47.3%; P < 0.001). In the analysis of subgroups categorized according to polyp size, the complete resection rate for hot snare polypectomy was significantly higher than that for cold snare polypectomy among polyps ≥6 mm (69.0% vs. 43.5%; P < 0.001). Among polyps ≤5 mm, no significant difference regarding the complete resection rate was observed between the methods (81.3% vs. 53.4%; P = 0.057). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that using hot snare polypectomy (odds ratio 3.03; P < 0.001), small lesion size (odds ratio 1.57; P = 0.049), and lesion location in the left colon (odds ratio 1.73; P = 0.007) were independent factors for complete resection.

CONCLUSION

Hot snare polypectomy provides a higher complete resection rate than does cold snare polypectomy for larger (6-10 mm) subcentimeter colorectal polyps.

Resection of Diminutive and Small Colorectal Polyps: What Is the Optimal Technique?

Colorectal polyps are classified as neoplastic or non-neoplastic on the basis of malignant potential. All neoplastic polyps should be completely removed because both the incidence of colorectal cancer and the mortality of colorectal cancer patients have been found to be strongly correlated with incomplete polypectomy. The majority of colorectal polyps discovered on diagnostic colonoscopy are diminutive and small polyps; therefore, complete resection of these polyps is very important. However, there is no consensus on a method to remove diminutive and small polyps, and various techniques have been adopted based on physician preference. The aim of this article was to review the diverse techniques used to remove diminutive and small polyps and to suggest which technique will be the most effective.