Continuous Anticoagulation and Cold Snare Polypectomy Versus Heparin Bridging and Hot Snare Polypectomy in Patients on Anticoagulants With Subcentimeter Polyps: A Randomized Controlled Trial

SIED-GISCOR recommendations for colonoscopy in screening programs: Part I - Diagnostic

The implementation of FIT programs reduces incidence and mortality from CRC in the screened subjects. The ultimate efficacy for CRC morbidity and mortality prevention in a FIT program depends on the colonoscopy in FIT+ subjects that has the task of detecting and removing these advanced lesions. Recently, there has been growing evidence on factors that influence the quality of colonoscopy specifically withing organized FIT programs, prompting to dedicated interventions in order to maximize the benefit/harm ratio of post-FIT colonoscopy. This document focuses on the diagnostic phase of colonoscopy, providing indications on how to standardise colonoscopy in FIT+ subjects, regarding timing of examination, management of antithrombotic therapy, bowel preparation, competence and sedation.

[IDEN Consensus on Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants are widely used in Korea due to increasing incidence of cardio-cerebrovascular disease and aging population. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures is an important clinical challenge. Clinical practice guideline regarding this issue which was developed by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy was published in 2020. However, since then, new evidence has emerged for the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and direct anticoagulant management, and revised guidelines were issued in the US and Europe. Accordingly, the previous guidelines were revised, cardiologists also participated in the development group, and the recommendations went through a consensus process among international experts. This guideline presents 14 recommendations made according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology, and was reviewed by multidisciplinary experts. This guideline provides useful information that can assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic and elective therapeutic endoscopy. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Safety of cold resection of non-ampullary duodenal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims Endoscopic resection has traditionally involved electrosurgical cautery (hot snare) to resect premalignant polyps. Recent data have suggested superior safety of cold resection. We aimed to assess the safety of cold compared with traditional (hot) resection for non-ampullary duodenal polyps. Methods We performed a systematic review ending in September 2022. The primary outcome of interest was the adverse event (AE) rate for cold compared with hot polyp resection. We reported odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary outcomes included rates of polyp recurrence and post-polypectomy syndrome. We assessed publication bias with the classic fail-safe test and used forest plots to report pooled effect estimates. We assessed heterogeneity using I 2 index. Results Our systematic review identified 1,215 unique citations. Eight of these met inclusion criteria, seven of which were published manuscripts and one of which was a recent meeting abstract. On random effect modeling, cold resection was associated with significantly lower odds of delayed bleeding compared with hot resection. The difference in the odds of perforation (odds ratio [OR] 0.31 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05-2.87], P =0.2, I 2 =0) and polyp recurrence (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.15-3.73], P =0.72, I 2 =0) between hot and cold resection was not statistically significant. There were no cases of post-polypectomy syndrome reported with either hot or cold techniques. Conclusions Cold resection is associated with lower odds of delayed bleeding compared with hot resection for duodenal tumors. There was a trend toward higher odds of perforation and recurrence following hot resection, but this trend was not statistically significant.

Periprocedural Anticoagulation Management of Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy with Polypectomy

Introduction/Objective  Colonoscopy with polypectomy is an integral component of colorectal cancer screening. There are limited data and consensus on periprocedural anticoagulation management, especially regarding bleeding risk with uninterrupted anticoagulation and thromboembolic risk with interruption. Our aim was to determine the incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications among colon screening participants undergoing colonoscopy following implementation of a novel patient care pathway for standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management. Methods  We conducted a retrospective study including all participants (age 50-74) on an oral anticoagulant (e.g., vitamin K antagonists, direct oral anticoagulants) referred to the British Columbia Colon Screening Program for colonoscopy following abnormal fecal immunochemical test in a 6-month period (March-August 2022). Data relating to their specific periprocedural anticoagulant management and colonoscopy results including method of polypectomy were obtained. Primary outcomes were major bleeding and arterial or venous thromboembolic events from time of oral anticoagulant interruption until 14 days of postcolonoscopy. Secondary outcomes included nonmajor and minor bleeding, acute coronary syndrome, emergency room visit, hospital admission, and death due to any cause. Results  Over the 6-month period, 162 participants completed standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management, colonoscopy ± polypectomy, and 14-day follow-up. One (0.6%) had a major bleeding event and one (0.6%) had an arterial thromboembolic event. Conclusions  A novel patient care pathway for standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management with a multidisciplinary team is associated with low rates of major bleeding and thrombotic complications after colonoscopy with polypectomy.

Updates on the Prevention and Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding in the Colon

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) remains a significant procedure-related complication, with multiple risk factors determining the risk including patient demographics, polyp characteristics, endoscopist expertise, and techniques of polypectomy. Immediate PPB is usually treated promptly, but management of delayed PPB can be challenging. Cold snare polypectomy is the optimal technique for small sessile polyps with hot snare polypectomy for pedunculated and large sessile polyps. Topical hemostatic powders and gels are being investigated for the prevention and management of PPB. Further studies are needed to compare these topical agents with conventional therapy.

HOT VERSUS COLD SNARE FOR COLORECTAL POLYPECTOMIES SIZED UP TO 10MM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer, and prevention relies on screening programs with resection complete resection of neoplastic lesions.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the best snare polypectomy technique for colorectal lesions up to 10 mm, focusing on complete resection rate, and adverse events.

METHODS

A comprehensive search using electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing hot versus cold snare resection for polyps sized up to 10 mm, and following PRISMA guidelines, a meta-analysis was performed. Outcomes included complete resection rate, en bloc resection rate, polypectomy, procedure times, immediate, delayed bleeding, and perforation.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs involving 8720 patients and 17588 polyps were included. Hot snare polypectomy showed a higher complete resection rate (RD, 0.02; 95%CI [+0.00,0.04]; P=0.03; I 2=63%), but also a higher rate of delayed bleeding (RD 0.00; 95%CI [0.00, 0.01]; P=0.01; I 2=0%), and severe delayed bleeding (RD 0.00; 95%CI [0.00, 0.00]; P=0.04; I 2=0%). Cold Snare was associated with shorter polypectomy time (MD -46.89 seconds; 95%CI [-62.99, -30.79]; P<0.00001; I 2=90%) and shorter total colonoscopy time (MD -7.17 minutes; 95%CI [-9.10, -5.25]; P<0.00001; I 2=41%). No significant differences were observed in en bloc resection rate or immediate bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Hot snare polypectomy presents a slightly higher complete resection rate, but, as it is associated with a longer procedure time and a higher rate of delayed bleeding compared to Cold Snare, it cannot be recommended as the gold standard approach. Individual analysis and personal experience should be considered when selecting the best approach.

International Digestive Endoscopy Network consensus on the management of antithrombotic agents in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are widely used in Korea because of the increasing incidence of cardiocerebrovascular disease and the aging population. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures is an important clinical challenge. The clinical practice guidelines for this issue, developed by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, were published in 2020. However, new evidence on the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and direct anticoagulant management has emerged, and revised guidelines have been issued in the United States and Europe. Accordingly, the previous guidelines were revised. Cardiologists were part of the group that developed the guideline, and the recommendations went through a consensus-reaching process among international experts. This guideline presents 14 recommendations made based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology and was reviewed by multidisciplinary experts. These guidelines provide useful information that can assist endoscopists in the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic and elective therapeutic endoscopy. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Efficacy of hemostatic gel for perioperative bleeding and prevention of delayed bleeding of cold snare polypectomy under anticoagulant

Background and Aim

A hemostatic gel, PuraStat (3-D Matrix, Tokyo, Japan), is used for various gastrointestinal hemostasis. In this study, we analyzed the efficacy of PuraStat for perioperative bleeding (POB) and prevention of delayed bleeding (DB) to colorectal cold snare polypectomy (CSP) with continuous anticoagulant.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective study. Subjects were lesions of 2-9 mm under continuous anticoagulant from 2021 to 2023 and treated with PuraStat for POB. The definition of POB was bleeding which did not stop spontaneously by 1.0-1.5 min after resection and needed hemostasis. Successful hemostasis was defined as cessation of bleeding within 1.0-1.5 min after spraying PuraStat and the rate of it and risk factors of POB were analyzed. For comparison, cases receiving previous CSP without PuraStat were extracted from all cases with CSP (2018-2021), and POB and DB rate (DBR) were analyzed after propensity score matching.

Results

One hundred twenty-two lesions (91: direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), 31: warfarin) with anticoagulant were analyzed and the rate of successful hemostasis with PuraStat was 92.6% (DOAC/warfarin: 93.4%/80.6%, P = 0.01). The rate of DB was 0.0%. Multivariate analysis showed that significant risk factors about unsuccessful hemostasis for POB with PuraStat were lesion size 8-9 mm (P < 0.01), warfarin (P = 0.01), and combination of antiplatelet (P = 0.01). Regarding the comparison about CSP with/without PuraStat, the clipping rate and DBR were 8.5%/94.9% (P < 0.01) and 0%/1.7% (P = 1.0).

Conclusion

The effects of PuraStat for POB and DB in colorectal CSP with continuous anticoagulant were acceptable.

Onset Time and Characteristics of Postprocedural Bleeding after Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Lesions: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Postprocedural bleeding is a major adverse event after endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions, but the optimal surveillance time after endoscopy is unclear. In this study, we determined onset time and characteristics of postprocedural bleeding events.

METHODS

We retrospectively screened patients who underwent endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions at three German hospitals between 2010 and 2019 for postprocedural bleeding events using billing codes. Only patients who required re-endoscopy were included for analysis. For identified patients, we collected demographic data, clinical courses, characteristics of colorectal lesions, and procedure-related variables. Factors associated with late-onset bleeding were determined by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

From a total of 6,820 patients with eligible billing codes, we identified 113 cases with postprocedural bleeding after endoscopic mucosal (61.9%) or snare resection (38.1%) that required re-endoscopy. The median size of the culprit lesion was 20 mm (interquartile range 14-30 mm). The median onset time of postprocedural bleeding was day 3 (interquartile range: 1-6.5 days), with 48.7% of events occurring within 48 h. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrates that a continued intake of antiplatelet drugs (OR: 3.98, 95% CI: 0.89-10.12, p = 0.025) and a flat morphology of the colorectal lesion (OR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.08-8.01, p = 0.031) were associated with an increased risk for late postprocedural bleeding (>48 h), whereas intraprocedural bleeding was associated with a decreased risk (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04-0.50, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Significant postprocedural bleeding can occur up to 18 days after endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions, but was predominantly observed within 48 h. Continued intake of antiplatelet drugs and a flat polyp morphology are associated with risk for late postprocedural bleeding.

Superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors now: endoscopic diagnosis and therapy

With the recent increase in the frequency of duodenal tumor detection, significant progress has been made in endoscopic diagnosis and treatment. Although the first guidelines were issued in Japan, patient treatment varies widely among institutions. There is a need for improving the quality of endoscopic diagnosis and more curative and safer treatments. Biopsy is the standard diagnostic method; however, the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic biopsy is not so high. Therefore, the differentiation of superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors from non-neoplastic lesions is being developed. The incidence of lymph node and distant metastases of duodenal epithelial tumors is extremely rare in intramucosal carcinomas, and they are considered good candidates for endoscopic treatment if the technical difficulties can be resolved. Adverse events associated with endoscopic treatment are greatly reduced at advanced facilities through novel resection and closure methods, and further improvements are expected in the future. Clarifying the risk of metastatic recurrence may lead to the development of more appropriate treatments and curative resection criteria.

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.

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.

Cold resection for colorectal polyps: where we are and where we are going?

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic resection of colonic precancerous lesions has been demonstrated to significantly decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Among resection techniques, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been shown as a highly feasible, effective and safe option and is widely used in clinical practice, being regarded as the first-line technique for removal of small and diminutive colorectal polyps. On the other hand, conventional hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), namely the gold standard treatments for larger polyps, may be occasionally associated to complications due to electrocautery injury.

AREAS COVERED

To overcome these shortcomings of electrocautery-based resection techniques, in the last few years CSP has been increasingly assessed as a treatment option for additional indications, with a focus on nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥10 mm.

EXPERT OPINION

This review aims to present current and widened indications of CSP discussing the latest findings from the most remarkable studies, with an insight into technical issues, novelties and potential advances in the near future.

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.

Complete endoscopic removal rate of detected colorectal polyps in a real world out-patient practical setting

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy with adenomatous polypectomy reduces the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. We introduced a strategy of removing all neoplastic polyps in single-session out-patient colonoscopy using cold polypectomy. We aimed to investigate the achievement of single-session complete removal rate of detected colorectal polyps in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included colonoscopy-scheduled 40-79-year-old outpatients, with at least one colorectal neoplasm, between January 2015 and December 2016. Exclusion criteria were: colorectal neoplasms 21 mm or larger in size; pre-examination for colorectal surgery or endoscopic submucosal dissection; colonoscopy performed by health check program; ongoing antithrombotic treatment; inflammatory bowel disease; familial adenomatous polyposis. We defined 'clean colon' as the removal of all detected neoplastic polyps in a single-session colonoscopy. We evaluated clean colon rate, factors relating to clean colon failure and complications.

RESULTS

We evaluated 2527 patients (mean age 68 years; 799 women) with 8203 colorectal polyps (7675 adenomas, 423 serrated lesions, 105 Tis and T1 cancers). In 1-4 mm polyps, cold snare polypectomy (CSP; 51.8%) and cold forceps polypectomy (CFP; 45.8%) were applied. Clean colon rates were 95.1% per patient and 97.1% per lesion. The significant factors denoting clean colon failure were inadequate bowel preparation, ≥5 lesions, and the most advanced estimated histology of adenocarcinoma, on multivariate analyses. Post-polypectomy bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis occurred in five patients (0.2%) who had undergone endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Perforation occurred in one patient (0.04%) with EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

The clean colon rates were satisfactory in single-session out-patient colonoscopy using cold polypectomy.

Colorectal cold snare polypectomy: Current standard technique and future perspectives

It has been shown that resection of adenomatous colorectal polyps can reduce mortality due to colorectal cancer. In daily clinical practice, simpler and safer methods of colorectal polypectomy have been sought to enable endoscopists to resect all detected lesions. Among these, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely used in clinical practice because of its advantages in shortening procedure time, reducing delayed bleeding risk, and lowering treatment costs, while maintaining a similar complete resection rate for lesions smaller than 10 mm when compared to conventional hot snare polypectomy. This review introduces the findings of previous studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of the CSP procedure for nonpedunculated polyps smaller than 10 mm, and describes technical points to remember when practicing CSP based on the latest evidence, including using a thin wire snare specifically designed for CSP, and observing the surrounding mucosa of the resection site with chromoendoscopy or image-enhanced endoscopy to ensure that there is no residual lesion. This review also describes the potential of expanding the indication of CSP as a treatment for lesions larger than 10 mm, those with pedunculated morphology, those located near the appendiceal orifice, and for patients under continuous antithrombotic agent therapy. Finally, the perspective on optimal treatments for recurrent lesions after CSP is also discussed, despite the limited related evidence and data.

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.

Efficacy and safety of intensive downstaging polypectomy (IDP) for multiple duodenal adenomas in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

 Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) risk developing multiple duodenal adenomas (MDAs), leading to duodenal cancer and death. We investigated the efficacy and safety of intensive downstaging polypectomy (IDP) for MDAs integrated with new-generation procedures.

METHODS

 This prospective phase II study, conducted at a tertiary cancer center, enrolled patients with FAP who had MDAs. We performed IDP including cold snare/forceps polypectomy (CSP/CFP) and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR). The primary end point was the downstaging of Spigelman stage at 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

 2424 duodenal polyps in 58 patients with FAP underwent IDP, including 2413 CSPs in 57 patients, seven CFPs in one patient, and four UEMRs in four patients. Only one major adverse event was observed (grade 3 hyperamylasemia) without clinical manifestations. We performed additional UEMR, CSP, and CFP for one, 12, and 22 patients, respectively, during initial follow-up. Overall, 55 patients completed protocol examination; the Spigelman stage was significantly reduced at the 1-year follow-up endoscopy (P < 0.001), with downstaging observed in 39 patients (71 %). Among the 26 patients with Spigelman stage IV at initial examination and protocol completion, 23 (88 %) showed downstaging. There was no major change in Spigelman stages from 1-year follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy to a median of 37 months (range 3-56).

CONCLUSIONS

 IDP, including new-generation procedures, showed significant downstaging with acceptable adverse events for MDA in patients with FAP, even those with advanced-stage disease. Lesion selection for different resection techniques may be important for suitable and sustainable management of MDA in patients with FAP.

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.

Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy: An American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

BACKGROUND

The American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline on the Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Therapy addresses 43 Patients-Interventions-Comparators-Outcomes (PICO) questions related to the perioperative management of patients who are receiving long-term oral anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and require an elective surgery/procedure. This guideline is separated into four broad categories, encompassing the management of patients who are receiving: (1) a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), mainly warfarin; (2) if receiving a VKA, the use of perioperative heparin bridging, typically with a low-molecular-weight heparin; (3) a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC); and (4) an antiplatelet drug.

METHODS

Strong or conditional practice recommendations are generated based on high, moderate, low, and very low certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology for clinical practice guidelines.

RESULTS

A multidisciplinary panel generated 44 guideline recommendations for the perioperative management of VKAs, heparin bridging, DOACs, and antiplatelet drugs, of which two are strong recommendations: (1) against the use of heparin bridging in patients with atrial fibrillation; and (2) continuation of VKA therapy in patients having a pacemaker or internal cardiac defibrillator implantation. There are separate recommendations on the perioperative management of patients who are undergoing minor procedures, comprising dental, dermatologic, ophthalmologic, pacemaker/internal cardiac defibrillator implantation, and GI (endoscopic) procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial new evidence has emerged since the 2012 iteration of these guidelines, especially to inform best practices for the perioperative management of patients who are receiving a VKA and may require heparin bridging, for the perioperative management of patients who are receiving a DOAC, and for patients who are receiving one or more antiplatelet drugs. Despite this new knowledge, uncertainty remains as to best practices for the majority of perioperative management questions.

Effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding in oral anticoagulant users: a propensity-score analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Evidence of prophylactic clipping is inconsistent except for proximal and large colonic lesions in the general population. Although warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are significant risk factors of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB), dedicated studies to examine the benefit of prophylactic clipping in these high-risk patients remain limited.

METHODS

We performed a propensity score-weighted retrospective cohort study from 2012 to 2020. Patients who received an oral anticoagulant and underwent colonoscopic polypectomy were included. Data were collected on baseline demographics, medications (anticoagulant, antiplatelet, and heparin bridging), and endoscopies (polyp number, location, size, morphology, histopathology, resection method and prophylactic clipping). Propensity-score models with inverse probability of treatment weighting were developed between prophylactic clipping and no clipping groups. Unbalanced variables were included in a doubly robust model with multivariate analysis. The primary outcome was clinically significant delayed PPB, defined as a composite endpoint of hemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dL, blood transfusion, or repeat colonoscopy for hemostasis within 30 days.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-seven patients with 1485 polyps were included. Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a reduced risk of PPB (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], .73-1.95; P = .497). The hot resection method was associated with a significantly higher risk of PPB (OR, 9.76; 95% CI, 3.94-32.60; P < .001) compared with cold biopsy or snare polypectomy. In a subgroup analysis, prophylactic clipping was associated with a lower PPB risk in patients on DOACs (OR, .36; 95% CI, .16-.82; P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping was not associated with an overall reduced risk of PPB in patients on oral anticoagulants. The use of cold snare polypectomy should be maximized in anticoagulated patients.

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.

Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions

The most common major adverse event of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB), with an incidence of 6%-7% in large lesions. Repeat colonoscopy, blood transfusions, or other interventions are often needed. The associated direct costs are much higher than those of an uncomplicated EMR. In this review, we discuss the aspects related to CSPEB of large nonpedunculated polyps, such as risk factors, predictive models, and prophylactic measures, and we highlight evidence for preventive treatment options and explore new methods for bleeding prophylaxis. We also provide recommendations for steps that can be taken before, during, and after EMR to minimize bleeding risk. Finally, this review proposes future directions to reduce CSPEB incidence.

Guidelines for Colorectal Cold Polypectomy (supplement to "Guidelines for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection/Endoscopic Mucosal Resection")

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society published the second edition of the "Guidelines for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection/Endoscopic Mucosal Resection" in 2019 to clarify the indications for colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection and to ensure appropriate preoperative diagnoses as well as effective and safe endoscopic treatment in front-line clinical settings. Endoscopic resection with electrocautery, including polypectomy and EMR, is indicated for colorectal polyps. Recently, the number of facilities introducing and implementing cold polypectomy without electrocautery has increased. Herein, we establish supplementary guidelines for cold polypectomy. Considering that the level of evidence for each statement is limited, these supplementary guidelines must be verified in clinical practice.

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 resection of superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor

Although superficial non‐ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor (SNADET) was previously considered a rare disease, in recent years, the opportunities to detect and treat SNADET are increasing. Considering the high morbidity of pancreatoduodenectomy, endoscopic resection can be a treatment option that preserves the organs and contributes maintain patients’ quality of life. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a standard treatment for relatively small lesions in gastrointestinal tracts, however, it is difficult because submucosal fibrosis frequently occurs due to the previous biopsy. Recently, some modified EMR techniques including underwater EMR (UEMR) and cold polypectomy (CP) have been proposed. In UEMR, the duodenal lumen is filled with water or saline and resected the targe lesion with a snare without injection into the submucosa. It would be a treatment option that could reduce candidates for ESD especially SNADET less than 20 mm. CP was reported as a safe and convenient means for SNADET. It would also be one of the standard treatments for diminutive lesions, though there remain some concerns on its resectability. ESD for SNADET is technically challenging, especially with an extremely high risk of adverse event (AE) with a reported bleeding rate of more than 20% and perforation rate up to about 40%. However, modified treatment techniques including the water pressure method and pocket creation method have been reported to potentially contribute to improving outcomes of ESD. Moreover, accumulated evidence shows closing the mucosal defect significantly reduces delayed adverse events after duodenal endoscopic treatments. Further studies are warranted to elucidate curative criteria, long‐term outcomes, and appropriate surveillance strategy.

American College of Gastroenterology-Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Management of Anticoagulants and Antiplatelets During Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding and the Periendoscopic Period

We conducted systematic reviews of predefined clinical questions and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach to develop recommendations for the periendoscopic management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs during acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and the elective endoscopic setting. The following recommendations target patients presenting with acute GI bleeding: For patients on warfarin, we suggest against giving fresh frozen plasma or vitamin K; if needed, we suggest prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) compared with fresh frozen plasma administration; for patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), we suggest against PCC administration; if on dabigatran, we suggest against the administration of idarucizumab, and if on rivaroxaban or apixaban, we suggest against andexanet alfa administration; for patients on antiplatelet agents, we suggest against platelet transfusions; and for patients on cardiac acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for secondary prevention, we suggest against holding it, but if the ASA has been interrupted, we suggest resumption on the day hemostasis is endoscopically confirmed. The following recommendations target patients in the elective (planned) endoscopy setting: For patients on warfarin, we suggest continuation as opposed to temporary interruption (1-7 days), but if it is held for procedures with high risk of GI bleeding, we suggest against bridging anticoagulation unless the patient has a mechanical heart valve; for patients on DOACs, we suggest temporarily interrupting rather than continuing these; for patients on dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention, we suggest temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor while continuing ASA; and if on cardiac ASA monotherapy for secondary prevention, we suggest against its interruption. Evidence was insufficient in the following settings to permit recommendations. With acute GI bleeding in patients on warfarin, we could not recommend for or against PCC administration when compared with placebo. In the elective periprocedural endoscopy setting, we could not recommend for or against temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for patients on a single P2Y12 inhibiting agent. We were also unable to make a recommendation regarding same-day resumption of the drug vs 1-7 days after the procedure among patients prescribed anticoagulants (warfarin or DOACs) or P2Y12 receptor inhibitor drugs because of insufficient evidence.

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: Can it be an “Underwater” revolution?

Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a newly developed technique for the removal of colorectal, duodenal, esophageal, gastric, ampullary, and small intestinal lesions. We performed a PubMed literature search for articles reporting UEMR outcomes for colorectal polyps. Four randomized controlled trials, nine non‐randomized prospective trials, 16 retrospective studies, and 27 case reports were selected for assessment of the efficacy and safety of UEMR. We summarized the therapeutic outcomes of UEMR in each category according to the lesion characteristics [small size (<10 mm), intermediate size (10–19 mm), large size (≥20 mm), recurrent lesion, and rectal neuroendocrine tumor], and calculated the incidence of adverse events among the included articles. As the treatment outcomes for small polyps appeared similar between UEMR and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR), UEMR can be a standard procedure for small colorectal polyps suspicious for high‐grade dysplasia to avoid incomplete removal of occult invasive cancer by cold snare polypectomy. As UEMR showed satisfactory outcomes for intermediate‐size lesions and recurrent lesions after endoscopic resection, UEMR can be a standard procedure for these lesions. Regarding large lesions and rectal neuroendocrine tumors, comparisons of UEMR with current standard methods for them were lacking, and further investigations are warranted. Adverse events appeared comparable or less frequent for UEMR compared with CEMR but still existed. Therefore, careful implementation of this new technique in clinical practice is important for its widespread use.

Polypectomy for Diminutive and Small Colorectal Polyps

Diminutive and small colorectal polyps are common findings during colonoscopies, and rarely contain dysplastic elements and progress to colorectal cancer. With improving technology and the advent of artificial intelligence, detection rates of small or diminutive polyps and adenomas are rising, resulting in increasing costs associated with colonoscopy. Incomplete resection rates are an outcome of interest because it correlates with interval colorectal cancer. More effort is warranted to standardize training programs and sensitize endoscopists to the importance of personal performance as a quality metric of colonoscopy. This article reviews indications, methods, and recent developments in polypectomy for small and diminutive polyps.

Management of Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Agents before and after Polypectomy

Antithrombotic medications, including antiplatelet drugs and anticoagulants, are widely prescribed to prevent thromboembolic disease. There is limited evidence informing gastroenterologists of the management of patients on antithrombotic medications undergoing colonoscopy and polypectomy. A patient's risk of thromboembolism versus postpolypectomy bleeding should be carefully considered, incorporating patient preferences concerning benefits and harms of temporary antithrombotic interruption. We will review the available consensus guidelines, current literature, and strategies to mitigate the risk of bleeding following polypectomy. These will be interpreted in the framework of shared decision-making with the patient to arrive at the safest solution best aligned with the patient's preferences.

Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile colon polyps: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND : For large sessile colorectal polyps (LSCPs), endoscopic mucosal resection without diathermy ("cold endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR]") is gaining popularity because of its safety advantages over conventional EMR ("hot EMR"). Polyp recurrence rates have been reported to be higher with cold EMR. Considering these differences, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of these two techniques. METHODS : A decision analysis model was constructed for EMR of an LSCP. The decision tree incorporated the EMR method, clip use, procedural mortality, adverse events and their management, and polyp recurrence. Outcomes included days of lost productivity and marginal cost difference. Adverse event and recurrence rates were extracted from the existing literature, giving emphasis to recent systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. RESULTS : Through 30 months of follow-up, the average cost of removing an LSCP by cold EMR was US$5213, as compared to $6168 by hot EMR, yielding a $955 cost difference (95 % confidence interval $903-$1006). Average days of lost productivity were 6.2 days for cold EMR and 6.3 days for hot EMR. This cost advantage remained over several analyses accounting for variations in recurrence rates and clip closure strategies. Clip cost and LSCP recurrence rate had the greatest and the least impacts on the marginal cost difference, respectively. CONCLUSION : Cold EMR is the dominant strategy over hot EMR, with lower cost and fewer days of lost productivity. In theory, a complete transition to cold EMR for LSCPs in the USA could result in an annual cost saving approaching US$7 million to Medicare beneficiaries.

American College of Gastroenterology-Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Management of Anticoagulants and Antiplatelets During Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding and the Periendoscopic Period

We conducted systematic reviews of predefined clinical questions and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach to develop recommendations for the periendoscopic management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs during acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and the elective endoscopic setting. The following recommendations target patients presenting with acute GI bleeding: For patients on warfarin, we suggest against giving fresh frozen plasma or vitamin K; if needed, we suggest prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) compared with fresh frozen plasma administration; for patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), we suggest against PCC administration; if on dabigatran, we suggest against the administration of idarucizumab, and if on rivaroxaban or apixaban, we suggest against andexanet alfa administration; for patients on antiplatelet agents, we suggest against platelet transfusions; and for patients on cardiac acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for secondary prevention, we suggest against holding it, but if the ASA has been interrupted, we suggest resumption on the day hemostasis is endoscopically confirmed. The following recommendations target patients in the elective (planned) endoscopy setting: For patients on warfarin, we suggest continuation as opposed to temporary interruption (1–7 days), but if it is held for procedures with high risk of GI bleeding, we suggest against bridging anticoagulation unless the patient has a mechanical heart valve; for patients on DOACs, we suggest temporarily interrupting rather than continuing these; for patients on dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention, we suggest temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor while continuing ASA; and if on cardiac ASA monotherapy for secondary prevention, we suggest against its interruption. Evidence was insufficient in the following settings to permit recommendations. With acute GI bleeding in patients on warfarin, we could not recommend for or against PCC administration when compared with placebo. In the elective periprocedural endoscopy setting, we could not recommend for or against temporary interruption of the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for patients on a single P2Y12 inhibiting agent. We were also unable to make a recommendation regarding same-day resumption of the drug vs 1–7 days after the procedure among patients prescribed anticoagulants (warfarin or DOACs) or P2Y12 receptor inhibitor drugs because of insufficient evidence.

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.

Endoscopy-Related Bleeding and Thromboembolic Events in Patients on Direct Oral Anticoagulants or Vitamin K Antagonists

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Few prospective studies have assessed the safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in elective endoscopy. Our primary aim was to compare the risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients on DOACs or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in this setting. Secondarily, we examined the impact of the timing of anticoagulant resumption on the risk of delayed bleeding in high-risk therapeutic procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study from January 2018 to March 2020 of 1602 patients on oral anticoagulants (1004 on VKAs and 598 on DOACs) undergoing 1874 elective endoscopic procedures. Our primary outcomes were 90-day thromboembolic events and 30-day endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding. The inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score method was used for baseline covariate adjustment.

RESULTS

The 2 groups had similar risks of endoscopy-related gastrointestinal bleeding (VKAs vs DOACs, 6.2% vs 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.67-1.65) and thromboembolic events (VKAs vs DOACs, 1.3% vs 1.5%; adjusted OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.34-2.38). In high bleeding risk procedures (n = 747), delayed anticoagulant resumption (> 48 hours or 24-48 hours vs < 24 hours) did not reduce the risk of postprocedural bleeding (10.3%, 9%, and 5.8%, respectively; adjusted P = .43). Hot and cold snare polypectomy were the most frequent high-risk interventions (41.8% and 39.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In a prospective study of patients on DOACs or VKAs undergoing elective endoscopy, endoscopy-related bleeding and thromboembolic events showed similar risk. Our study suggests that early anticoagulant resumption is safe in most patients, but more data are needed for advanced high-risk therapeutic procedures.

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.

Performance of perioperative antibiotics against post-endoscopic submucosal dissection coagulation syndrome: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative antibiotics against post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) coagulation syndrome (PECS) in patients undergoing colorectal ESD.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled, parallel, superiority trial was conducted at 21 Japanese tertiary institutions. Patients with superficial colorectal lesions ≥20 mm and those undergoing ESD management for a single lesion were eligible. Patients with perforation during and after ESD were withdrawn. Before the ESD procedure, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either undergo conventional treatment (nonantibiotic group) or investigational treatment (antibiotic group). In the antibiotic group, 3 g of ampicillin-sulbactam was administered just before, 8 hours after, and the morning after ESD. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PECS. The onset of PECS was defined as localized abdominal pain (both spontaneous pain and tenderness) and fever (≥37.6°C) or inflammatory response (leukocytosis [≥10,000 cells/μL] or elevated C-reactive protein level [≥.5 mg/dL]).

RESULTS

From February 5, 2019 to September 7, 2020, 432 patients were enrolled and assigned to the antibiotic group (n = 216) or nonantibiotic group (n = 216). After withdrawal of 52 patients, 192 in the antibiotic group and 188 in the nonantibiotic group were analyzed. PECS occurred in 9 of 192 patients (4.7%) in the antibiotic group and 14 of 188 patients (7.5%) in the nonantibiotic group, with an odds ratio of .61 (95% confidence interval, .23-1.56; P = .29).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative use of antibiotics was not effective in reducing the incidence of PECS in patients undergoing colorectal ESD. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000035178.).

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.

Cold snare polypectomy for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumor: a prospective clinical trial (pilot study)

BACKGOUND

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) can minimize the risk of adverse events and has become a standard treatment for small colorectal polyps. CSP might also be suitable for small superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADETs). This study aimed to evaluate the safety of CSP for SNADETs.

METHODS

The major indication criteria were as follows: (1) endoscopically diagnosed SNADET, (2) ≤ 10 mm, and (3) a single primary lesion. CSP was performed using an electrosurgical snare without electrocautery. Follow-up endoscopy and scar biopsy were performed 3 months after CSP. The primary endpoint was the delayed adverse events rate.

RESULTS

In total, 21 patients were enrolled. Two and 19 lesions were located in the duodenal bulb and 2nd portion, respectively; the median lesion size was 8 mm. CSP was attempted for all lesions; three lesions could not be resected without electrocautery and were removed by conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The rate of spurting bleeding after CSP was 0%. The median procedure time was 12 min, the median resected specimen size was 12 mm, and the rate of en bloc resection was 81% (17/21). No adverse events were observed intraoperatively, with no delayed adverse events after CSP. Histopathology revealed 15 adenomas, 4 cancers (intramucosal), and 2 non-neoplastic lesions. The horizontal margins were negative/positive/undetermined in 9, 1, and 11 cases, respectively. All vertical margins were negative. Only one recurrence was detected by follow-up endoscopy 3 months after CSP.

CONCLUSIONS

CSP can be performed safely for small SNADETs.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm ), and the registration number is UMIN000019157.

Recurrence rate and lesions characteristics after cold snare polypectomy of high-grade dysplasia and T1 lesions: A multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

High-grade dysplasia (HGD) and T1 lesions are accidentally resected by cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and the characteristics, and follow-up of them has not been reported. In this study, we analyzed the histopathological findings and recurrence of them.

METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective-cohort study. We collected HGD and T1 lesions of ≤ 10 mm resected by CSP among 15 520 patients receiving CSP from 2014 to 2019 at nine related institutions, and we extracted only cases receiving definite follow-up colonoscopy after CSP of HGD and T1 lesions. We analyzed these tumor's characteristics and therapeutic results such as R0 resection and local recurrence and risk factors of recurrence.

RESULTS

We collected 103 patients (0.63%) and extracted 80 lesions in 74 patients receiving follow-up colonoscopy for CSP scar. Mean age was 68.4 ± 12.0, and male rate was 68.9% (51/80). The mean tumor size (mm) was 6.6 ± 2.5, and the rate of polypoid morphology and rectum location was 77.5% and 25.0%. The rate of magnified observation was 53.8%. The rates of en bloc resection and R0 resection were 92.5% and 37.5%. The local recurrence rate was 6.3% (5/80, median follow-up period: 24.0 months). The recurrence developed within 3 months after CSP for four out of five recurrent cases. Comparing five recurrent lesions to 75 non-recurrent lesions, a positive horizontal margin was a significant risk factor (60.0% vs 10.7%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

High-grade dysplasia and T1 resected by CSP were analyzed, and the local recurrence rate of them was substantially high.

Complications of colonoscopy in Japan: An analysis using large-scale health insurance claims data

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In Japan, screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer is expected to reduce colorectal cancer mortality, although its complication rate has not been sufficiently examined. The aim of this study is to analyze severe complications due to colonoscopy.

METHODS

As a study population, we retrospectively used commercially anonymized health insurance claims data covering 5.71 million patients from January 2005 to August 2018. We extracted patients who received colonoscopy with lesions resection or without treatment. Main outcomes were rates of hemorrhage, perforation, fatal events, and their risk factors.

RESULTS

Among 341 852 colonoscopy without treatment in 260 128 patients (mean age: 49.6 ± 11.7 years), the rates of hemorrhage, perforation, and fatal events were 0.0059% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0031-0.0085), 0.0032% (95% CI 0.0011-0.0052), and 0.00029% (95% CI 0-0.0012), respectively. Regarding hemorrhage, compared with the rate for patients <50 years old (0.0050%), the rates for those 50-59, 60-69, and ≥70 years old were 0.0095% (P = 0.17), 0.0031% (P = 0.17), and 0%, respectively. Regarding perforation, compared with patients <50 years old (0.0056%), the rates for those 50-59, 60-69, and ≥70 years old were 0%, 0.0015% (P = 0.99), and 0.0102% (P = 0.99), respectively. A multivariate analysis for risk factors showed no significant findings for hemorrhage and perforation without treatment. Among 123 087 colonoscopy with lesions resection in 102 058 patients (mean age: 53.7 ± 9.3 years), the rates of hemorrhage, perforation, and fatal events were 0.136% (95% CI 0.1157-0.1572), 0.033% (95% CI 0.0228-0.0437), and 0.00081% (95% CI 0-0.0035), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis using health insurance claims data demonstrated the safety of colonoscopy.

Risk of delayed bleeding after hot snare polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colorectum with continuation of anticoagulants

Background

Current guidelines recommend the temporary discontinuation of anticoagulants before colonoscopic polypectomy, but the effect of this practice on reducing the risk of delayed bleeding after hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) remains unclear. Our aim was to assess the impact of anticoagulants on the risk of colorectal delayed bleeding after HSP and EMR, and evaluate the necessity of drug withdrawal.

Methods

We reviewed the clinical data of patients with colorectal polyps using antithrombotic drugs who underwent HSP and/or EMR between January 2016 and September 2020 at Nagaoka Red Cross Hospital. After excluding antiplatelet users, patients were classified into those who continued anticoagulants [continuation group: 50 patients (93 lesions)] and those who discontinued anticoagulants [discontinuation group: 87 patients (190 lesions)].

Results

Delayed bleeding occurred in 12 lesions, and there was no significant difference in the incidence rates between the continuation and the discontinuation groups (3.2% vs. 4.7%; P=0.756). Logistic regression analysis showed that continued use of anticoagulants was not a significant risk factor for delayed bleeding compared to anticoagulant discontinuation (odds ratio, 0.670; 95% CI, 0.177-2.537; P=0.556). There was no significant difference in the incidence rate and risk of delayed bleeding, regardless of the length of the anticoagulant withdrawal period.

Conclusions

Continued use of anticoagulants, compared to their discontinuation, did not increase the risk of colorectal delayed bleeding after HSP and EMR. Our results suggest that current guideline recommendations for anticoagulant withdrawal before colonoscopic polypectomy may be reconsidered.

Trial Registration

UMIN000040449.

Bleeding after endoscopic resection between direct oral anticoagulants or warfarin: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Oral anticoagulants are risk factors for post-endoscopic resection bleeding. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for the risks of post-procedural bleeding (PPB) for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin following endoscopic resection.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score was used to assess the quality of the studies, the pooled odds ratio (OR) to present PPB results, and the funnel plots to assess publication bias. The Higgins I² statistic was employed to determine the variation across studies due to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We reviewed 30 articles. PPB occurred in 586 patients on DOACs and 1782 on warfarin. The patients on DOACs had a significantly lower overall risk of PPB compared with those on warfarin (OR, 0.867, 95% confidence interval, 0.771-0.975; P = 0.017, I²  = 1.6%). Cumulative meta-analysis showed that the PPB rate of DOACs has the trend to be lower than that of warfarin with publication year and sample size. For the subgroup of endoscopic submucosal dissection, the PPB of DOACs was significantly lower than that of warfarin (OR, 0.786; 95% confidence interval, 0.633-0.976; P = 0.029, I²  = 0%). No significant difference was observed between DOACs and warfarin for anticoagulant strategies, endoscopic procedures, and lesion location.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with warfarin, DOACs have the possibility to significantly decrease the risk of PPB following endoscopic resection, especially for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

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.