Prophylactic clipping and post-polypectomy bleeding: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Endoscopic mucosal resection: tips and tricks for gastrointestinal trainees

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a minimally invasive, specialized endoscopic technique that is useful in resecting superficial gastrointestinal lesions that are unable to be removed by standard polypectomy. This is typically accomplished using a submucosal injection that lifts the lesion away from the muscularis propria to allow for safe resection of the polyp, either via piecemeal or en bloc resection. Over the years, several techniques exist to perform EMR including conventional EMR or hot EMR, cold EMR and underwater EMR. Despite its established advantages and safety over conventional techniques such as surgery, the adoption of endoscopic resection (and thus the education and training of gastroenterology trainees) is lagging. The goal of this article is to offer a comprehensive review of the basic principles of colonic EMR. We review the concepts of optical diagnosis including the various polyp classification systems available to determine the polyp morphology and histology. We also discuss the technical aspects of performing colonic EMR. We also outline the common adverse events associated with EMR including bleeding, perforation, postpolypectomy syndrome, and residual or recurrent polyps, and discuss preventative measures that can be taken to mitigate adverse events. Lastly, we offer practical tips for trainees who want to undertake EMR in their clinical practice.

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.

A Comparative Study of Early Mucosal Healing Following Hot Polypectomy and Cold Polypectomy

Background

Cold polypectomy (CP) and hot polypectomy (HP) are both accepted methods for polypectomy. In recent years, the use of CP has increased for reasons of safety. However, there have been few investigations of conditions at follow-up early after resection. This prospective study from a single center aimed to compare colonic mucosal healing at 1 week following HP vs CP of benign colonic polyps <10 mm in diameter.

Material/Methods

Six patients with a total of 52 lesions under 10 mm in size were randomized to either the HP group (n=25) or CP group (n=27) using information in opaque envelopes. One week after endoscopic treatment, the site of treatment was evaluated using colonoscopy. We assessed the mean tumor size, ulcer diameter, exposed blood vessels, residual lesion, and complications.

Results

Mean tumor size did not differ between the 2 groups (CP vs HP: 5.41 mm vs 5.68 mm). The CP group had a smaller ulcer base diameter (2.70 mm vs 4.84 mm; P<0.05) and fewer exposed blood vessels than the HP group (3.7% vs 36.0%; P<0.05). One residual lesion was found in the CP group. No patients experienced delayed perforation or post-polypectomy bleeding.

Conclusions

Our study findings showed that at 1-week follow-up, cold polypectomy resulted in improved colonic mucosal healing, with a smaller ulcer diameter and fewer blood vessels, when compared with hot polypectomy.

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.

Role of prophylactic hemoclip placement in prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding for large colon polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Polypectomy is a widely used and effective procedure to treat precancerous polyps. Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB), a common complication of polypectomy, may diminish the utility of this procedure. Previous data on the efficacy of hemoclips has been conflicting, therefore we aimed to collectively evaluate and analyze the data to reach a definitive conclusion on the efficacy of using hemoclips to prevent incidences of DPPB in patients with large polyps (≥10 mm).

Methods

We identified a total of 261 studies based on our previously defined search strategy. After screening, we included 6 randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis was performed comparing the use of prophylactic application of hemoclips to a standard group without prophylactic clip placement for large polyps.

Results

We found a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of DPPB when using hemoclips for large polyps. The overall incidence of DPPB was lower in the hemoclip group compared to the standard group for all large polyps ≥10 mm (relative risk 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.75; P=0.01; I ²=0%).

Conclusions

The use of hemoclips in achieving hemostasis for large polyps has a beneficial effect and appears to prevent DPPB. This reinforces the routine clinical practice of using hemoclips in polypectomy procedures.

Endoscopic clipping for gastrointestinal bleeding: emergency and prophylactic indications

Endoscopic clipping has become a common practice among endoscopists. Several models are available, most frequently being introduced via the working channel of the endoscope (through-the-scope); however, larger clips can also be mounted onto the distal tip of the endoscope (over-the-scope). The main indications for endoclip placement include providing effective mechanical hemostasis for bleeding lesions and allowing endoscopic closure of gastrointestinal perforations. Endoclips can also be used prophylactically after endoscopic resection; however, this practice is still controversial. This review discusses the main indications for endoscopic clipping in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum and colon to manage acute bleeding lesions, and the criteria to be used in the prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding.

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.

Colonoscopic post-polypectomy bleeding in patients on uninterruptedclopidogrel therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Current guidelines recommend temporary cessation of clopidogrel for 7-10 days for patients on clopidogrel undergoing colonoscopy with polypectomy. However, recent prospective randomized controlled trials have advocated for uninterrupted clopidogrel, due to similar post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) rates with and without continued clopidogrel therapy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to assess the risk of PPB rate in patients on continued clopidogrel therapy. Systemically identified publications were used to compare the rate of PPB in patients on continued clopidogrel therapy with those who had interrupted clopidogrel therapy. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPB. The secondary outcomes were immediate PPB, delayed PPB and serious cardio-thrombotic events. This study has been registered in PROSPERO (no. CRD42018118325). A total of five studies were identified, which included 655 patients in the continued clopidogrel group and 6620 patients in the control group. There was an increased risk of PPB with continued clopidogrel [P=0.0003; risk ratio (RR), 1.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.36-2.83). The rate of immediate PPB was slightly higher in the continued clopidogrel group (5.77% vs. 1.77%, respectively), but was not statistically significant (P=0.06; RR, 1.57; 95%CI, 0.98-2.51). The rate of delayed PPB was increased in the continued clopidogrel group (P=0.0008; RR, 3.10; 95%CI, 1.60-5.98). However, no significant difference in serious cardio-thrombotic events was observed within 30 days (P=0.74; RR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.18-3.40). Although continued clopidogrel therapy decreased the incidence of serious cardio-thrombotic events, the risk of delayed PPB was increased. Therefore, endoscopists should make all preparations to prevent bleeding in the perioperative period for patients at high thrombotic risk and on continued clopidogrel therapy, if polypectomy cannot be reasonably postponed.

Use of the Endoscopic Clipping Over the Scope Technique to Treat Acute Severe Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the Colon and Anal Transition Zone

Endoscopic treatment of lower gastrointestinal bleeding can be challenging. This article reports on the use of the endoscopic clipping over the scope technique to treat acute severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding. In particular, it describes the approaches and outcomes of using the technique for acute severe bleeding in the colon and the anal transition zone. The following synopsis is the one that you supplied, but lightly copyedited. Please confirm OK. Please note that the synopsis will appear in PubMed: Endoscopic treatment of lower gastrointestinal bleeding can be challenging. This article reports on the use of the endoscopic clipping over the scope technique to treat acute severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding. In particular, it describes the approaches and outcomes of using the technique for acute severe bleeding in the colon and the anal transition zone.

Endoscopic Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is one of the most common complications of endoscopic polypectomy. There are multiple risk factors related to patient and polyp characteristics that should be considered. In most cases, immediate PPB can be effectively managed endoscopically when recognized and managed promptly. Delayed PPB can manifest in a myriad of ways. In severe delayed PPB, resuscitation for hemodynamic stabilization should be prioritized, followed by endoscopic evaluation and therapy once the patient is stabilized. Future areas of research in PPB include the risks of direct oral anticoagulants and of specific electrosurgical settings for hot-snare polypectomy vs. cold-snare polypectomy, benefits of closure of post-polypectomy mucosal defects using through-the-scope clips, and prospective comparative evaluation of newer hemostasis agents such as hemostatic spray powder and over-the-scope clips.

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

Background and study aims  Delayed bleeding is believed to occur less frequently after cold snare polypectomy (CSP), but this has not been validated in clinical trials. This study aimed to compare rates of delayed bleeding after CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Patients and methods  We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Participants scheduled to undergo endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm were enrolled and randomly assigned to CSP or HSP. Prophylactic clipping was performed at the endoscopists' discretion. The primary outcome was delayed bleeding rate. Secondary outcomes included immediate bleeding rate and clipping rate. Sample size calculation showed that 451 patients were required in each arm. Results  At the end of the study period decided in advance, 308 participants were recruited and an interim analysis was performed. A total of 273 patients (mean age 62.2 ± 8.8 years; 188 males) were analyzed, with 139 patients allocated to CSP and 134 to HSP. In total, 367 polyps were resected with CSP and 360 polyps with HSP. There were no significant differences in patient demographics or polyp characteristics. In per-patient-based analysis, delayed bleeding rates were 0.7 % after CSP and 0.7 % after HSP. Per-polyp analysis showed similar results (CSP: 0.3 % vs. HSP: 0.6 %). The immediate bleeding rate was significantly higher with CSP vs. HSP (54 % vs.14 %, P  < 0.0001), while clipping rates were 18 % and 19 %, respectively. Conclusion  This interim analysis did not demonstrate that delayed bleeding after CSP is less frequent than after HSP. The delayed bleeding rate after HSP was lower than expected. Meeting presentations: Digestive Disease Week 2017.

Devices for endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal GI bleeding (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic intervention is often the first line of therapy for GI nonvariceal bleeding. Although some of the devices and techniques used for this purpose have been well studied, others are relatively new, with few available outcomes data.

METHODS

In this document, we review devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of nonvariceal GI bleeding, the evidence regarding their efficacy and safety, and financial considerations for their use.

RESULTS

Devices used for endoscopic hemostasis in the GI tract can be classified into injection devices (needles), thermal devices (multipolar/bipolar probes, hemostatic forceps, heater probe, argon plasma coagulation, radiofrequency ablation, and cryotherapy), mechanical devices (clips, suturing devices, banding devices, stents), and topical devices (hemostatic sprays).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic evaluation and treatment remains a cornerstone in the management of nonvariceal upper- and lower-GI bleeding. A variety of devices is available for hemostasis of bleeding lesions in the GI tract. Other than injection therapy, which should not be used as monotherapy, there are few compelling data that strongly favor any one device over another. For endoscopists, the choice of a hemostatic device should depend on the type and location of the bleeding lesion, the availability of equipment and expertise, and the cost of the device.

Current strategies for malignant pedunculated colorectal polyps

Despite significant advances in imaging techniques, the incidence of colorectal cancer has been increasing in recent years, with many cases still being diagnosed in advanced stages. Early detection and accurate staging remain the main factors that lead to a decrease in the cost and invasiveness of the curative techniques, significantly improving the outcome. However, the diagnosis of pedunculated early colorectal malignancy remains a current challenge. Data on the management of pedunculated cancer precursors, apart from data on nonpolypoid lesions, are still limited. An adequate technique for complete resection, which provides the best long-term outcome, is mandatory for curative intent. In this context, a discussion regarding the diagnosis of malignancy of pedunculated polyps, separate from non-pedunculated variants, is necessary. The purpose of this review is to provide a critical review of the most recent literature reporting the different features of malignant pedunculated colorectal polyps, including diagnosis and management strategies.

Routine Prophylactic Endoscopic Clipping Is Not Efficacious in the Prevention of Delayed Post-Polypectomy Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and Aims

Colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented through colonoscopic polypectomy, but this exposes patients to risks, including delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB). Endoscopists increasingly use clips prophylactically with the aim of preventing DPPB. However, clips are costly, and data to support their efficacy in this context are inconsistent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy of prophylactic clipping for preventing DPPB.

Methods

We searched electronic databases and other relevant sources for randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of prophylactic clipping versus no clipping for the prevention of DPPB. Pooled relative risks were determined using a fixed-effects model. Subgroup analyses were also performed.

Results

A total of 2305 citations were initially screened. Seven randomized controlled trials satisfied all criteria for inclusion. The quality of included studies was generally low to moderate. A total of 2851 patients underwent 5405 polypectomies. Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding occurred at an overall pooled rate of 2.5%. No overall benefit of clipping for preventing DPPB was observed, with a pooled relative risk of 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.36). No significant patient or polyp factors predicting DPPB were found through subgroup analyses. No publication bias was identified.

Conclusions

Randomized trials to date do not demonstrate a protective effect of prophylactic clipping for the prevention of DPPB, and therefore, the practice of routine prophylactic clipping appears unjustified. Additional high quality randomized trials are required to identify higher-risk groups that may benefit from prophylactic clipping.

Optimizing Resection of Large Colorectal Polyps

OPINION STATEMENT

Polypectomy reduces the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). The widespread adoption of CRC screening, more rigorous colonoscopy techniques, and advancements in endoscopic imaging have led to a greater awareness of complex polyps. Whereas surgery was once considered necessary for many large sessile or laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) in the colorectum, the majority can now be removed endoscopically. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an established technique for treatment of colorectal LSLs. When performed by experts, EMR is highly effective and safe and can be completed in an outpatient or day-stay setting. Advancements in EMR effectiveness encompass a better understanding of the factors leading to post-EMR recurrence, protocols to recognize and treat it, and interventions that prevent recurrent or residual adenoma. New techniques for treating intra-procedural bleeding and a novel classification system to identify and inform proactive management of deep mural injury enhance the safety profile of EMR. However, each of these incremental advancements necessitates a meticulous and systematic approach that only committed and properly trained endoscopists can master. While alternative interventions such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) offer potential advantages over EMR, the added procedural complexity, risks, and costs limit the relevance of ESD to a minority of lesions in the colorectum. This article reviews the expanding body of evidence supporting EMR as the first-line treatment of colorectal LSLs ≥20 mm.