Risk factors for delayed colonic post-polypectomy bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Delphi consensus statement for the management of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding

Background

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is the most common adverse event following colonic polypectomy, yet its management remains highly heterogeneous and lacks standardization. A considerable number of colonoscopies performed for DPPB may be unnecessary and do not result in hemostatic intervention.

Objectives

To develop evidence-based statements to guide clinical decision-making in DPPB.

Design

Multidisciplinary Delphi consensus statement.

Methods

A panel of 29 experts in gastroenterology, hematology, radiology, and surgery was assembled. Through a systematic review of the literature and a modified Delphi process, consensus statements were developed through iterative rounds of anonymous voting. Statements were revised following anonymous voting and feedback at each round. Those achieving 80% agreement were accepted.

Results

The expert panel reached a consensus on 36 statements, covering areas such as antithrombotic management, bowel preparation, colonoscopy indications, and therapeutic hemostatic modalities. Key recommendations include guidance for managing self-limited bleeding and risk stratification to reduce the rate of unnecessary colonoscopies, as well as recommendations for hemodynamically unstable patients who may require primary angioembolization. A practical clinical algorithm is proposed.

Conclusion

This document provides a consensus-based framework for managing DPPB. These recommendations aim to improve patient outcomes and optimize healthcare resources while fostering a standardized approach to this common adverse event.

Safety and Efficacy of Cold Compared With Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is traditionally performed using electrosurgical cautery (hot snare) to resect premalignant colorectal polyps. Recent data have suggested the superior safety of cold EMR (c-EMR), even for polyps ≥20 mm in size. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of c-EMR compared with traditional (hot) EMR (h-EMR).

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive systematic review ending in December 2024. The primary outcome of interest was the odds of delayed bleeding for c-EMR compared with h-EMR of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. The secondary outcomes included early bleeding, perforation, and polyp recurrence. Publication bias was assessed using the classic fail-safe test. Forest plots were used to report the pooled effect estimates. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 .

RESULTS

Our systematic review identified 1,632 unique citations, a total of 3 randomized controlled trials and 4 nonrandomized comparative studies were identified and included in the primary analyses. Four additional cohort studies were included in the secondary analyses. On random-effects modeling, c-EMR was associated with a significantly lower risk of delayed bleeding (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11-0.57, P = 0.001, I2 = 0%), early bleeding (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.2-0.6, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), and perforation (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.51, P = 0.003, I2 = 0%) than h-EMR. c-EMR was associated with a higher rate of recurrence (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.01-3.25, P = 0.045, I2 = 72%).

DISCUSSION

c-EMR has a superior safety profile to h-EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size, but strategies to manage the higher odds of recurrence remain essential.

A dynamic online nomogram for predicts delayed postoperative bleeding after colorectal polyp surgery

This study aims to analyze the risk factors associated with delayed postoperative bleeding (DPPB) following colorectal polyp surgery, develop a dynamic nomogram and evaluate the model efficacy, provide a reference for clinicians to identify the patients at high risk of DPPB. Retrospective study was done on patients who underwent endoscopic colorectal polypectomy at the First Hospital of Lanzhou University from January 2020 to March 2023. Differences between the group with and without DPPB were compared, and independent risk factors for DPPB occurrence were identified through univariate analysis and combination LASSO and logistic regression. A dynamic nomogram was constructed based on multiple logistic regression to predict DPPB following colorectal polyp surgery. Model evaluation included receiver operating characteristic (ROC), Calibration curve, Decision curve analysis (DCA). DPPB occurred in 38 of the 1544 patients included. multivariate analysis showed that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), polyp location in the right hemi colon, polyp diameter, drink, and prophylactic hemoclips were the independent risk factors for DPPB and dynamic nomogram were established. Model validation indicated area under the ROC curve values of 0.936, 0.796, and 0.865 for the training set, validation set, and full set, respectively. The calibration curve demonstrated a strong alignment between the predictions of the column-line diagram model and actual observations. The decision curve analysis (DCA) displayed a significant net clinical benefit across the threshold probability range of 0-100%. The dynamic nomogram aids clinicians in identifying high-risk patients, enabling personalized diagnosis and treatment.

Colorectal Post-polypectomy Bleeding in Outpatient versus Inpatient Treatment: Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objectives

Delayed bleeding is the most frequent adverse event associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) of colorectal polyps. However, whether the incidence of delayed bleeding differs between outpatient and inpatient treatment is unknown. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate delayed bleeding rates between outpatient and inpatient endoscopic treatments and clarify the safety of outpatient treatment.

Methods

We enrolled 469 patients (1077 polyps) and 420 patients (1080 polyps) in the outpatient and inpatient groups, respectively, who underwent EMR or HSP for colorectal polyps at our institution between April 2020 and May 2023. Using propensity score matching, we evaluated the delayed bleeding rates between the two groups. Delayed bleeding was defined as a hemorrhage requiring endoscopic hemostasis occurring within 14 days of the procedure.

Results

Propensity score matching created 376 (954 polyps) matched patient pairs. The median maximum diameter of polyps removed was 10 mm in both groups. Delayed bleeding rates per patients were 1.3% (5/376) in the outpatient group and 2.9% (11/376) in the inpatient group (P=0.21). In term of per polyp, early delayed bleeding (occurring within 24 hours) rates were higher in the inpatient group than outpatient group (0.2% [2/954] vs. 1.1% [10/954], respectively; P=0.04). No severe bleeding requiring a transfusion occurred in either group.

Conclusions

Outpatient endoscopic treatment did not increase delayed bleeding compared with inpatient treatment. Outpatient treatment would be safe and common for the removal of colorectal polyps.

Risk factors for delayed colorectal postpolypectomy bleeding: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To systematically analyze risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) in colorectum.

METHODS

We searched seven large databases from inception to July 2022 to identify studies that investigated risk factors for DPPB. The effect sizes were expressed by relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The heterogeneity was analyzed by calculating I2 values and performing sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 15 articles involving 24,074 subjects were included in the study. The incidence of DPPB was found to be 0.02% (95% CI, 0.01-0.03), with an I2 value of 98%. Our analysis revealed that male sex (RR = 1.64), history of hypertension (RR = 1.54), anticoagulation (RR = 4.04), polyp size (RR = 1.19), polyp size ≥ 10 mm (RR = 2.43), polyp size > 10 mm (RR = 3.83), polyps located in the right semicolon (RR = 2.48) and endoscopic mucosal resection (RR = 2.99) were risk factors for DPPB.

CONCLUSIONS

Male sex, hypertension, anticoagulation, polyp size, polyp size ≥ 10 mm, polyps located in the right semicolon, and endoscopic mucosal resection were the risk factors for DPPB. Based on our findings, we recommend that endoscopists should fully consider and implement effective intervention measures to minimize the risk of DPPB.

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.

Comparing efficacy and factors of postoperative bleeding in endoscopic mucosal resection vs coagulation for intestinal polyps

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) and Argon Plasma Coagulation (APC) as therapeutic approaches for intestinal polyps in patients, and to examine the factors associated with postoperative bleeding. This study included 132 patients diagnosed with colorectal polyps (188 polyps) who underwent endoscopic surgery at our hospital between January 2022 and December 2022. Based on the surgical method employed, the patients were divided into 2 groups: EMR (68 cases, 97 polyps) and APC (64 cases, 91 polyps). Comparative analyses were conducted to assess the clinical efficacy, surgery-related indicators, and quality of life the 2 groups. Furthermore, an investigation was carried out to identify the factors associated with postoperative bleeding. The analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the cure rate of flat and superficial raised polyps between the EMR group and the APC (P > .05). However, it was found that the EMR group exhibited a significantly higher cure rate for subpedunculated and raised-pedunculated polyps compared to the APC group (P < .05). The results of logistics analysis showed that patients with hypertension (OR = 2.876, 95% CI: 1.119-7.393), patients with diabetes (OR = 5.278, 95% CI: 1.388-20.064), patients with hyperlipidemia (OR = 2.594, 95% CI: 1.054-6.380), the polyps of right hemicolon (OR = 2.743, 95% CI: 1.003-7.504), rectal polyps (OR = 5.143, 95% CI: 1.728-7.504), pedunculated polyps (OR = 4.758, 95% CI: 1.322-17.129), adenomatous polyps (OR = 3.152, 95% CI: 1.018-9.757) were independent risk factors for postoperative bleeding in patients with colorectal polyps (P < .05). The findings suggest that for subpedunculated and pedunculated-raised polyps, EMR can be a suitable treatment approach. On the other hand, flat and superficial-raised polyps can be effectively managed with either EMR or APC. The presence of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, polyps of the right hemicolon, rectal polyps, pedunculated polyps, and adenomatous polyps has been established as independent risk factors for postoperative bleeding in patients with colorectal polyps.

Complications after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal cancer (Review)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a gastrointestinal malignancy that seriously threatens human life and health, resulting in a heavy disease burden. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used in clinical practice and is an effective treatment for early CRC (ECC). Colorectal ESD is a challenging operation, and the incidence of postoperative complications is relatively high because of the thin intestinal wall and limited space for endoscopic operations. Systematic reports on the postoperative complications of colorectal ESD, such as fever, bleeding and perforation, from both China and elsewhere are lacking. In the present review, progress in research on postoperative complications after ESD for ECC is summarized.

Establishment of a model for predicting delayed post-polypectomy bleeding: A real-world retrospective study

Background

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is the most common complication which occurs within 30 days after polypectomy, it has become rather common with the widespread of colorectal cancer screening. It is important to clarified predictors of DPPB and identify patients at high risk.

Materials and methods

This was a real-world retrospective study based on medical records from The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. Cases of patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy between January 2016 and December 2020 were reviewed to identify risk factors of DPPB. We use the LASSO-Logistic regression analysis model to identify independent predictors and create a predictive model. The model finally got visualized by developing a nomogram.

Results

Colonoscopic polypectomy was done on 16,925 patients in our study. DPPB occurred in 125 (0.74%) of these instances. In multivariate analysis, age, sex, hypertension, polyp location, polyp size, and operative modality were found to be independent risk factors and were integrated for the construction of a nomogram. The model’s C-index is 0.801 (95%CI: 0.761–0.846). We also found polyps located at the right semicolon and polyp ≥ 1 cm associated with active bleeding under the therapeutic colonoscopy.

Conclusion

Young age, male, hypertension, polyp ≥ 1 cm, proximal colon location and operative modality were finally identified as significant predictors of DPPB. We developed and validated a nomogram which performs well in predicting the incidence of DPPB, the model we established can be used as a valuable screening tool to identify patients who are at high risk of bleeding.

Prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding by prophylactic clipping after endoscopic colorectal polypectomy: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis aims to investigate the role of prophylactic clipping after endoscopic colorectal polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in prevention of delayed bleeding (DB) following polypectomy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of prophylactic clipping versus no clipping on DB since inception to 22nd April 2022. We then performed a meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

We included 8 studies with 5648 patients and 10,436 lesions. Prophylactic clipping did not reduce the overall risk of DB compared with no clipping (1.54% vs 2.05%; Log RR, -0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.59, 0.01; P = 0.06). In subgroup analyses, clipping significantly reduced DB rate in polyps ≥ 2 cm (Log RR, -0.63; 95% CI, -1.08, -0.18; P = 0.01), in non-pedunculated polyps (Log RR, -0.63; 95% CI, -1.01, -0.24; P = 0.00), and in large (≥ 2 cm) proximal polyps (Log RR, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.56, 0.05; P = 0.04), but not in polyps < 2 cm (Log RR, 0.01; 95% CI, -.40, 0.42; P = 0.95).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic clipping does not prevent post-polypectomy bleeding after all EMR and should not be performed as a routine practice. Although prophylactic clipping may reduce DB rate following resection of large proximal polyps and non-pedunculated polyps, more high-quality studies are needed to determine the effects of factors such as polyp location, polyp morphology, antithrombotic drug use and complete or partial closure on the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping.

Comparison of cold snare and hot snare polypectomy for the resection of sporadic nonampullary duodenal adenomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonampullary duodenal adenomas can undergo malignant transformation, making endoscopic resection, often by hot snare (HSP) or cold snare polypectomy (CSP), necessary. Although CSP has been shown to be safer for removal of colon polyps, data comparing these techniques for the resection of duodenal adenomas are limited. Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of CSP and HSP for the removal of nonampullary duodenal adenomas.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients referred to 2 academic medical centers with a histologically confirmed sporadic, nonampullary duodenal adenoma who underwent endoscopic snare polypectomy between January 1, 2007 and March 1, 2021. Patients with underlying polyposis syndromes were excluded. Outcomes included postprocedural adverse events and polyp recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 110 total patients, 69 underwent HSP and 41 underwent CSP. Intraprocedural bleeding was similar between both groups, but 7 patients in the HSP group experienced delayed adverse events versus none in the CSP group (P = .04). Fifty-four patients had complete polyp resection and subsequent surveillance endoscopies. Multivariate analysis showed polyp size to be associated with recurrence (per mm; odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.20; P < .01). Endoscopic resection technique (HSP vs CSP) was not a predictor of recurrence (P = .18).

CONCLUSIONS

HSP led to more delayed adverse events compared with CSP, whereas no significant differences on outcomes were noted, suggesting that CSP is equally effective and potentially safer for the removal of duodenal adenomas.

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.

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.

Safety of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Korea: A Nationwide Survey and Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Attention should be paid to endoscopy-related complications and safety-related accidents that may occur in the endoscopy unit. This study investigated the current status of complications associated with diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy in Korea.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey on endoscopy-related complications was conducted in a total of 50 tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The results were compared to the population-level claims data from the Health Insurance Review &amp; Assessment Service (HIRA), which analyzed endoscopy procedures conducted in 2017 in Korea.

RESULTS

The incidences of bleeding associated with diagnostic and therapeutic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and with diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy were 0.224% and 3.155% and 0.198% and 0.356%, respectively, in the 2017 HIRA claims data, compared to 0.012% and 1.857%, and 0.024% and 0.717%, in the 50 hospitals surveyed. The incidences of perforation associated with diagnostic and therapeutic EGD and with diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy were 0.023% and 0.613%, and 0.007% and 0.013%, respectively, in the 2017 HIRA claims data compared to 0.001% and 0.325%, and 0.017% and 0.206%, in the 50 hospitals surveyed. In the HIRA claims data, the incidence of bleeding/perforation after diagnostic colonoscopy in clinics, community hospitals, general hospitals, and tertiary hospitals was 0.129%/0.000%, 0.088%/0.004%, 0.262%/0.009%, and 0.479%/0.030% respectively, and the corresponding incidence of bleeding/perforation after therapeutic colonoscopy was 0.258%/0.004%, 0.401%/0.007%, 0.408%/0.024%, and 0.731%/0.055%.

CONCLUSION

The incidences of complications associated with diagnostic and therapeutic EGD or colonoscopy tended to increase with the hospital volume in Korea.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0001728.

Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Polyps: Identifying High-Risk Patients

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a potentially severe complication of therapeutic colonoscopy which can result in hospital readmission and re-intervention. Over the last decade, rates of DPPB reported in the literature have fallen from over 2% to 0.3–1.2%, largely due to improvements in resection technique, a shift towards cold snare polypectomy, better training, adherence to guidelines on periprocedural antithrombotic management, and the use of antithrombotics with more favourable bleeding profiles. However, as the complexity of polypectomy undertaken worldwide increases, so does the importance of identifying patients at increased risk of DPPB. Risk factors can be categorised according to patient, polyp and personnel related factors, and their integration together to provide an individualised risk score is an evolving field. Strategies to reduce DPPB include safe practices relevant to all patients undergoing colonoscopy, as well as specific considerations for patients identified to be high risk. This narrative review sets out an evidence-based summary of factors that contribute to the risk of DPPB before discussing pragmatic interventions to mitigate their risk and improve patient safety.

Power of big data to improve patient care in gastroenterology

Big data is defined as being large, varied or frequently updated, and usually generated from real-world interaction. With the unprecedented availability of big data, comes an obligation to maximise its potential for healthcare improvements in treatment effectiveness, disease prevention and healthcare delivery. We review the opportunities and challenges that big data brings to gastroenterology. We review its sources for healthcare improvement in gastroenterology, including electronic medical records, patient registries and patient-generated data. Big data can complement traditional research methods in hypothesis generation, supporting studies and disseminating findings; and in some cases holds distinct advantages where traditional trials are unfeasible. There is great potential power in patient-level linkage of datasets to help quantify inequalities, identify best practice and improve patient outcomes. We exemplify this with the UK colorectal cancer repository and the potential of linkage using the National Endoscopy Database, the inflammatory bowel disease registry and the National Health Service bowel cancer screening programme. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are increasingly being used to improve diagnostics in gastroenterology, with image analysis entering clinical practice, and the potential of machine learning to improve outcome prediction and diagnostics in other clinical areas. Big data brings issues with large sample sizes, real-world biases, data curation, keeping clinical context at analysis and General Data Protection Regulation compliance. There is a tension between our obligation to use data for the common good and protecting individual patient's data. We emphasise the importance of engaging with our patients to enable them to understand their data usage as fully as they wish.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Endoscopic management of delayed bleeding after polypectomy of small colorectal polyps: two or more clips may be safe

Background

The resection of small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm) is routine for endoscopists. However, the management of one of its main complications, namely delayed (within 14 days) postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB), has not been clearly demonstrated. We aimed to assess the role of coloscopy in the management of DPPB from small colorectal polyps and identify the associated factors for initial hemostatic success.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 69 patients who developed DPPB after the removal of colorectal polyps of ≤10 mm and underwent hemostatic colonoscopy at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) between April 2013 and June 2021. Demographics, clinical variables, and colonoscopic features were collected independently. We applied univariate and multivariate analyses to assess factors associated with initial hemostatic success.

Results

General colonoscopy without oral bowel preparation was successfully performed in all the patients, with a median duration of 23.9 (12.5–37.9) minutes. Among 69 patients, 62 (89.9%) achieved hemostasis after initial hemostatic colonoscopy and 7 (10.1%) rebled 2.7 ± 1.1 days after initial colonoscopic hemostasis and had rebleeding successfully controlled by one additional colonoscopy. No colonoscopy-related adverse events occurred. Multivariate analysis showed that management with at least two clips was the only independent prognostic factor for initial hemostatic success (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.03–0.91; P = 0.04). All the patients who had at least two clips placed at the initial hemostatic colonoscopy required no further hemostatic intervention.

Conclusions

Colonoscopy is a safe, effective, and not too time-consuming approach for the management of patients with DPPB of small colorectal polyps and management with the placement of at least two hemoclips may be beneficial.

Management and Outcomes of Bleeding Within 30 Days of Colonic Polypectomy in a Large, Real-Life, Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Management of delayed (within 30 days) postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) has not been standardized. Patients often undergo colonoscopies that do not provide any benefit. We aimed to identify factors associated with therapeutic intervention and active bleeding after DPPB.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 548 patients with bleeding within 30 days after an index polypectomy (DPPB; 71.9% underwent colonoscopy, 2.6% underwent primary angiographic embolization, and 25.5% were managed without intervention) at 6 tertiary centers in Spain, from January 2010 through September 2018. We collected demographic and medical data from patients. The primary outcomes were the need for therapeutic intervention and the presence of active bleeding during colonoscopy.

RESULTS

A need for therapeutic intervention was associated independently with the use of antithrombotic agents, hemoglobin decrease greater than 2 g/dL, hemodynamic instability, and comorbidities (P < .05). The bleeding point during colonoscopy was identified in 344 patients; 74 of these patients (21.5%) had active bleeding. Active use of anticoagulants (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5), left-sided polyps (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1-3.8), prior use of electrocautery (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.1), and pedunculated polyp morphology (OR, 1.8, 95% CI, 1-3.2) significantly increased the risk of encountering active bleeding. We developed a visual nomogram to estimate the risk of active bleeding. Overall, 43% of the cohort did not require any hemostatic therapy. Rebleeding (<6%) and transfusion requirements were low in those managed without intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

In a study of patients with DPPB, we found that almost half do not warrant any therapeutic intervention. Colonoscopy often is overused for patients with DPPB. We identified independent risk factors for active bleeding that might be used to identify patients most likely to benefit from colonoscopy.

Postpolypectomy bleeding of colorectal polyps in patients with continuous warfarin and short-term interruption of direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) is the most common adverse event after colorectal polypectomy. Use of anticoagulants is an important risk factor for PPB. This study aimed to evaluate PPB in patients receiving treatment with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

METHODS

Between August 2017 and July 2019, 5449 patients with 12,601 polyps who underwent endoscopic snare resection of colorectal polyps were enrolled. Endoscopic snare resection was performed in patients receiving continuous warfarin (C-warfarin) and in patients who experienced 1 day cessation of (O-) of DOACs in accordance with the Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines.

RESULTS

The PPB rate in the group receiving anticoagulants was statistically higher than that in the group without anticoagulants (8.5% [33/387] vs 1.2% [63/5,062], respectively; P < .001). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, male gender (odds ratio [OR], 2.17; P = .007), warfarin (OR, 4.64; P < .001), DOACs (OR, 6.59; P < .001), and multipolyp removal (OR, 1.77; P = .007) were significant risk factors for PPB. PPB was observed in 9 and 21 patients in the C-warfarin and O-DOACs groups, respectively: C-warfarin (8.0% [9/113]), O-dabigatran (6.1% [2/33]), O-rivaroxaban (14.8% [9/61]), O-apixaban (9.8% [9/92]), and O-edoxaban (1.8% [1/56]). The PPB rate with the O-edoxaban group was significantly lower than that with the O-rivaroxaban group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of anticoagulant therapy was an independent risk factor for PPB. The rates of PPB in patients receiving C-warfarin and O-DOACs were also higher than those in patients not receiving anticoagulants. Edoxaban may be safe through short-term withdrawal in patients undergoing endoscopic snare resection of colorectal polyps.

Effect of Instruction on Preventing Delayed Bleeding after Colorectal Polypectomy and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection

Background: The frequency of delayed bleeding after colorectal polypectomy has been reported as 0.6–2.8%. With the increasing performance of polypectomy under continuous use of antithrombotic agents, care is required regarding delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB). Better instruction to educate endoscopists is therefore needed. We aimed to evaluate the effect of instruction and factors associated with delayed bleeding after endoscopic colorectal polyp resection. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study was performed to assess instruction in checking complete hemostasis and risk factors for onset of DPPB. The incidence of delayed bleeding, comorbidities, and medications were evaluated from medical records. Characteristics of historical control patients and patients after instruction were compared. Results: A total of 3318 polyps in 1002 patients were evaluated. The control group comprised 1479 polyps in 458 patients and the after-instruction group comprised 1839 polyps in 544 patients. DPPB occurred in 1.1% of polyps in control, and 0.4% in after-instruction. Instruction significantly decreased delayed bleeding, particularly in cases with antithrombotic agents. Hot polypectomy, clip placement, and use of antithrombotic agents were significant independent risk factors for DPPB even after instruction. Conclusion: The rate of delayed bleeding significantly decreased after instruction to check for complete hemostasis. Even after instruction, delayed bleeding can still occur in cases with antithrombotic agents or hot polypectomy.

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.

Application of a novel self-assembling peptide to prevent hemorrhage after EMR, a feasibility and safety study

Background

A novel self-assembling peptide (SAP) can be applied to the post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) defect to treat oozing bleedings. It has been suggested to stimulate early healing of damaged vessels. We hypothesized that SAP application could prevent delayed bleeding (DB) after EMR and performed a prospective cohort study to determine feasibility and safety.

Methods

A total of 48 consecutive patients who underwent EMR between June 2018 and August 2019 for large lesions in the esophagus, duodenum (> 1 cm) or colorectum (> 2 cm) were treated with adjuvant SAP application. Duration and ease of SAP application were measured, as well as DB outcome.

Results

The EMR defects of 48 patients were treated with SAP; 17 in the esophagus, 13 in the duodenum and 18 in the colorectum. SAP was easy to apply on the EMR defect with a median duration of 2.0 min. A dose of 3 cc was generally enough to cover a defect between 10 and 50 mm. An exploratory analysis of the prophylactic ability of SAP showed that 15.9% of patients (7/44) treated with SAP still had a DB, mostly in the duodenum (4/11). No adverse events related to gel exposure were reported.

Conclusions

SAP application after EMR was found to be feasible and safe, and did not delay the procedure; however, DB was still relatively common. Future comparative studies are needed to evaluate whether SAP is able to reduce DB after EMR, particularly for lesions with an increased bleeding risk, such as in the duodenum.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07819-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effect of prophylactic clipping on adverse events after colorectal endoscopic resection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of prophylactic hemoclip placement on the risk of adverse events such as delayed bleeding and perforation after colorectal polypectomy is still unclear. Its efficiency has not been confirmed and there is no consensus on the usefulness of prophylactic clipping.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of prophylactic clipping on adverse events after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps.

METHODS

We performed a search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Wanfang databases for studies comparing the effect of clipping vs no clipping on adverse events following endoscopic resection. The quality of the included studies was performed. Statistical analysis was performed using Revman5.3 software.

RESULTS

We identified seven eligible randomized trials from the database search, involving a total of 3777 patients, which included 1880 patients who used prophylactic hemoclips (clip group) and 1897 who did not use (no clip group). Meta-analysis results showed that the delayed bleeding rate of the clip group was significantly lower than that of the no clip group (2.55% vs 4.48%, P = 0.01, 95%CI: 0.40-0.80). There was no significant difference in postoperative perforation rate between the clip group and no clip group (0.66% vs 1.04%, P = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.21-1.92). Subgroup analysis showed that the prophylactic effect on delayed bleeding was mainly observed in polyps with a size of ≥ 20 mm, and the preventive effect in polyps less than 20 mm was poor (RR = 1.18, 95%CI: 0.62-2.23, P = 0.62; RR = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.29-0.77, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the effect of prophylactic hemoclips on the prevention of delayed bleeding after resection of proximal and distal colonic polyps (RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.18-1.80, P = 0.34; RR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.06-10.33, P = 0.85).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic hemoclips can prevent the occurrence of delayed bleeding after colorectal polypectomy, which is mainly observed in the lesions ≥ 20 mm. In addition, hemoclips have little preventive effect on postoperative perforation.

Prophylactic Clipping After Colorectal Endoscopic Resection Prevents Bleeding of Large, Proximal Polyps: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The benefits of prophylactic clipping to prevent bleeding after polypectomy are unclear. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of randomized trials to assess the efficacy of clipping in preventing bleeding after polypectomy, overall and according to polyp size and location.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases for randomized trials that compared the effects of clipping vs not clipping to prevent bleeding after polypectomy. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to generate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Multilevel random-effects metaregression analysis was used to combine data on bleeding after polypectomy and estimate associations between rates of bleeding and polyp characteristics.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 9 trials, comprising 71897 colorectal lesions (22.5% 20 mm or larger; 49.2% with proximal location). Clipping, compared with no clipping, did not significantly reduce the overall risk of postpolypectomy bleeding (2.2% with clipping vs 3.3% with no clipping; RR, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-1.08; P = .072). Clipping significantly reduced risk of bleeding after removal of polyps that were 20 mm or larger (4.3% had bleeding after clipping vs 7.6% had bleeding with no clipping; RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.33-0.78; P = .020) or that were in a proximal location (3.0% had bleeding after clipping vs 6.2% had bleeding with no clipping; RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.81; P < .001). In multilevel metaregression analysis that adjusted for polyp size and location, prophylactic clipping was significantly associated with reduced risk of bleeding after removal of large proximal polyps (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.61; P = .021) but not small proximal lesions (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.48-1.62; P = .581).

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis of randomized trials, we found that routine use of prophylactic clipping does not reduce risk of postpolypectomy bleeding overall. However, clipping appeared to reduce bleeding after removal of large (more than 20 mm) proximal lesions.

Risk of Delayed Bleeding after a Colorectal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection without Prophylactic Clipping: Single Center, Observational Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Bleeding is one of the major complications of a colorectal polypectomy. The aim of this study was to identify the risk of delayed bleeding, particularly after a colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) without prophylactic clipping.

METHODS

Between April 2014 and August 2014, patients who underwent colorectal EMR (≥6 mm and <2 cm) without prophylactic clipping were included. This study evaluated the incidence of delayed bleeding and the associated factors after colorectal EMR without prophylactic clipping.

RESULTS

A total of 717 colorectal polyps (≥6 mm and <2 cm) of 243 patients resected by colorectal EMR in the study period were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 63 years; 165 patients were men and 78 patients were women. The mean polyp size removed by colorectal EMR was 9.0 mm (range 6.0-19.0), and the number of polyps larger than 1 cm was 212 (29.6%). Delayed bleeding after colorectal EMR occurred in 12 polyps (1.7%) in eight patients (3.3%), and there were no significant risk factors affecting delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified that the incidence of delayed bleeding on colorectal polyps (≥6 mm and <2 cm) after EMR without prophylactic clipping was 3.3%, but no significant risk factors affecting delayed bleeding were found.

[Medical Dispute Related to Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Complications: Prevention and Management]

Because gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy examinations are being performed increasingly frequently, the rate of detection of cancer and of precancerous lesions has increased. Moreover, development of more advanced endoscopic technologies has expanded the indications for, and thus frequency of, therapeutic endoscopic procedures. However, the incidence of complications associated with diagnostic or therapeutic GI endoscopy has also increased. The complications associated with GI endoscopy can be ameliorated by endoscopic or conservative treatment, but caution is needed as some of the more serious complications, such as perforation, can lead to death. In this chapter, we review the possible complications of GI endoscopy and discuss methods for their prevention and treatment.

Prophylactic endoscopic coagulation to prevent delayed post-EMR bleeding in the colorectum: a prospective randomized controlled trial (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Post-EMR bleeding (PEB) is the most common adverse event after EMR. However, there are no established endoscopic methods for the prevention of PEB. This study aimed to investigate whether prophylactic endoscopic coagulation (PEC) using coagulation probes reduces the incidence of overall delayed PEB.

METHODS

We performed a randomized controlled study of patients undergoing EMR for large (≥10 mm) sessile lesions and laterally spreading tumors. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the EMR with coagulation group (n = 285) or EMR (control) group (n = 285). Immediate bleeding during colon EMR or clean-based ulcer after EMR was excluded. Clinically significant PEB was defined as bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis, hospitalization, or a decrease in the hemoglobin level >2 g/dL.

RESULTS

A total of 569 patients were analyzed. The incidence of overall PEB was significantly lower in the EMR with coagulation group than in the control group (12.6% [36/285] vs 18.7% [53/284], P = .048). However, this was largely because of a reduction in minor bleeding. There was no difference in clinically significant PEB (1.8% [5/285] vs 3.2% [9/284], P = .276). Rectal location was a risk factor associated with overall PEB (odds ratio, 1.256; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.41; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study found reduced PEB with prophylactic cautery of visible vessels, this was largely because of a reduction in minor bleeding with no benefit observed for clinically significant bleeding. Overall, PEB was more frequent with rectal lesions. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT0000779.).

The effect of anticoagulants on delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The withdrawal of antithrombotic therapy from patients at high risk of thromboembolism is controversial. Previously, treatment with anticoagulants, such as warfarin and dabigatran, was recommended for heparin bridge therapy (HBT) during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, HBT is associated with a high risk of bleeding during and after ESD. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of colorectal ESD in patients treated with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC).

METHODS

This study included 412 patients with superficial colorectal neoplasms that were resected by ESD between June 2010 and June 2018. The patients were classified into two groups: without antithrombotics (n = 286) and with anticoagulants (n = 51). The anticoagulants group was further divided into two groups: warfarin (n = 26) and DOAC (n = 25).

RESULTS

Among all patients, delayed bleeding occurred in 35 (8.5% [35/412]) patients. The bleeding rate in the anticoagulants group (11.8% [6/51]) was higher than that in the group without antithrombotics (6.6% [19/286]), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.240). The bleeding rate in the DOAC group (16.0% [4/25]) was higher than that in the warfarin group (7.7% [2/26]), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.419). All delayed bleeding was successfully managed with endoscopic hemostasis. Thromboembolic events were not observed in any patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The bleeding rate with anticoagulants was relatively high. However, all bleeding events with anticoagulants were minor and clinically controllable. Colorectal ESD with DOAC and warfarin may be feasible and acceptable.

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.

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.