Prophylactic submucosal saline-adrenaline injection in colonoscopic polypectomy: prospective randomized study

Hydrogels in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Gastrointestinal Cancers

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) has emerged as a pivotal technique for the minimally invasive treatment of early gastrointestinal cancers, offering benefits such as reduced trauma, lower complication rates, and cost-effectiveness. Despite its advantages, the selection of optimal biomaterials for submucosal injection poses significant challenges. Current materials used in clinical settings often suffer from rapid diffusion, requiring multiple injections and potentially causing localized inflammation. These issues underscore the importance of identifying more effective submucosal injection materials to minimize postoperative complications and enhance patient outcomes. Recent advancements have highlighted the potential of hydrogels in this context, favored for their ability to maintain mucosal elevation longer and support wound healing. This review comprehensively examines the development and application of hydrogels in ESD, focusing on their physicochemical properties, biocompatibility, and the clinical implications of their use. These issues discuss various formulations of hydrogels, their mechanisms of action, and comparative analyses with traditional materials. Furthermore, the review explores ongoing innovations and future perspectives in hydrogel research, aiming to catalyze further advancements in ESD techniques. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: This review critically examines hydrogel technologies in endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastrointestinal cancers, highlighting their role in improving procedural outcomes and patient recovery. It explores hydrogels' ability to enhance mucosal elevation, reduce complications, and accelerate healing, offering insights into their transformative potential in medical treatments. The findings emphasize the development of innovative materials that could significantly advance clinical practices in gastrointestinal cancer management.

Additional Stem Resection for Control of Massive Bleeding After Polypectomy for a Pedunculated Colonic Polyp

Background

Polypectomy-associated bleeding is the most frequent complication of colorectal polypectomy.

Case Presentation

An 82-year-old woman underwent polypectomy after an endoloop was placed in a pedunculated polyp in the sigmoid colon. However, the endoloop dislodged, causing massive bleeding from the stem surface. Furthermore, the bleeding vessel could not be identified because of the narrow resection surface and the presence of thrombus and hemorrhage. Therefore, several clips were removed, and polypectomy was performed again on the resection stem to open the resection surface wider and identify the bleeding vessels. Finally, the responsible arterial vessel appeared, leading to complete hemostasis.

Conclusion

The additional stem resection may be a novel method for detecting uncontrolled bleeding after polypectomy for colorectal pedunculated polyps.

Submucosal injection fluid and tattoo agents

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, developed for the removal of benign and early malignant lesions throughout the GI tract. Submucosal injection of a marking agent can help to identify lesions during surgery. Endoscopic resection frequently involves "lifting" of the lesions by injection of a substance within the submucosal space to create a cushion for safe resection. This review summarizes the current techniques and agents available for endoscopic marking and lifting of GI tract lesions.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched through April 2023 for relevant articles related to the lifting and marking aspect of EMR by using key words such as "endoscopy" or "endoscopic" combined with "marking," "tattoo," and "lifting." The report was drafted, reviewed, and edited by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and approved by the Governing Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

RESULTS

This technology review describes the techniques for endoscopic tattoo placement and submucosal lifting, along with currently available agents, safety, and costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopists performing EMR and ESD have several choices in submucosal injection materials for lifting and marking agents for tattoos. These may be commercially prepared agents or off-the-shelf materials with or without additives to facilitate visualization. A thorough understanding of the indications, techniques, properties of various agents, costs, and adverse events is necessary in choosing the appropriate materials and technique to optimize lesion resection in EMR and ESD.

Endoscopic management of giant colonic polyps: a retrospective Italian study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Polyps greater than 30 mm are classified as "giants". Their endoscopic removal represents a technical challenge. The choice of the endoscopic removal technique is important because it provides a resection sample for precise histopathological staging. This is pivotal for diagnostic, prognostic, and management purposes.

METHODS

From a retrospective analysis, we obtained a sample of 38 giant polyps. Eighteen polypectomies were performed using the epinephrine volume reduction (EVR) method, nine polypectomies utilized endo-looping or clipping methods, and 11 patients underwent surgery.

RESULTS

We obtained en bloc resection with the EVR method in all cases; histology confirmed the correct indication for endoscopic resection in all cases. Moreover, no early or delayed complications were observed, and no patient required hospitalization. Using endo-looping or clipping methods, we observed advanced histology in 1/9 (11.1%) cases, while another patient (1/9, 11.1%) had delayed bleeding. Among patients who underwent surgery, 5/11 (45.5%) were deemed overtreated and three had post-surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose EVR as an alternative technique for giant polyp resection due to its safety, effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and the advantage of avoiding the need to postpone polypectomy to a later time. Further prospective studies might help improve this experience and enhance the technique.

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.

The Effectiveness of Prophylactic Epinephrine Compared to No Prophylaxis for Postpolypectomy Bleeding in Endoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Colorectal cancer prevention has seen significant advancements with colonoscopic polypectomy, a critical technique in clinical practice. However, postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB), particularly in the resection of large pedunculated polyps, remains a major complication. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the efficacy of prophylactic epinephrine injections in preventing PPB, addressing inconsistencies in the literature regarding its effectiveness. Employing a comprehensive search strategy, we rigorously selected studies for inclusion, focusing on those comparing prophylactic epinephrine with no intervention. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, ensuring a robust and reliable analysis. Our findings, based on an analysis of four studies involving 1,062 patients, indicate a significant reduction in early PPB with epinephrine use, with a marked decrease in bleeding incidence compared to the no-prophylaxis group. However, the impact on delayed bleeding was less conclusive, suggesting the need for further research in this area. Our study thus highlights the effectiveness of epinephrine as a preventive tool in colonoscopic polypectomy while underscoring the complexity of bleeding risks and the necessity for ongoing investigation in optimizing patient outcomes.

Difficult colorectal polypectomy: Technical tips and recent advances

Colonoscopy has been shown to be an effective modality to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) development. CRC reduction is achieved by detecting and removing adenomas, which are precursors of CRC. Most colorectal polyps are small and do not pose a significant challenge for trained and skilled endoscopists. However, up to 15% of polyps are considered "difficult", potentially causing life-threatening complications. A difficult polyp is defined as any polyp that is challenging for the endoscopist to remove owing to its size, shape, or location. Advanced polypectomy techniques and skills are required to resect difficult colorectal polyps. There were various polypectomy techniques for difficult polyps such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater EMR, Tip-in EMR, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or endoscopic full-thickness resection. The selection of the appropriate modality depends on the morphology and endoscopic diagnosis. Several technologies have been developed to aid endoscopists in performing safe and effective polypectomies, especially complex procedures such as ESD. These advances include video endoscopy system, equipment assisting in advanced polypectomy, and closure devices/techniques for complication management. Endoscopists should know how to use these devices and their availability in practice to enhance polypectomy performance. This review describes several useful strategies and tips for managing difficult colorectal polyps. We also propose the stepwise approach for difficult colorectal polyps.

[Endoscopic prevention of bleeding during resection of mucous membrane neoplasms of hollow organs of gastrointestinal tract]

OBJECTIVE

To optimize endoscopic prevention of bleeding during resection of mucous membrane neoplasms of hollow organs of gastrointestinal tract and minimize the risk of intra- and postoperative complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS. A S

Ystematic review and meta-analysis were made in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. Statistical analysis was performed in Cohrane Review Manager ver. 5.4.

RESULTS. THERE ARE 3

Methods of endoscopic prevention of bleeding during polypectomy, i.e. 0.01% adrenaline injection, endoscopic clip placement and endoscopic polyp band ligation. Endoscopic polyp band ligation is characterized by minimum complication rate.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic polyp band ligation is preferable due to minimum complication rate. If ligation is impossible, prophylactic clip placement may be performed. Adrenaline injection is the least effective method and may be used only if two above-mentioned methods are ineffective.

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.

Impact of including epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for colorectal EMR on postprocedural pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EMR is first-line therapy for colorectal laterally spreading lesions. Some colonoscopists include epinephrine in the submucosal injectate, which we observed increased postprocedure discomfort. Our aim was to determine whether inclusion of epinephrine in the submucosal injectate increases postprocedure pain after EMR.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial comparing epinephrine in submucosal injectate versus injectate alone for abdominal pain at 30 and 60 minutes after EMR.

RESULTS

Mean polyp diameter in both arms was >40 mm. There were no differences in procedure times or amounts of fluid injected. Mean pain was higher on a visual analog scale in the epinephrine group at 30 minutes (47 vs 14, P = .022) and at 60 minutes (44 vs 13, P = .035). Recovery room stay was longer in the epinephrine group (68 vs 53 minutes, P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Epinephrine in the submucosal injectate for EMR increases postprocedural pain, which could cause diagnostic confusion and prolong observation time in the recovery area. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04065451.).

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.

Heat sink effect of underwater polypectomy in a porcine colon model

BACKGROUND

Underwater polypectomy without the need for submucosal injection has been reported. A heat-sink effect by immersing the polyp in water was proposed but no such experiment has been performed to support the claim. We compared the temperature rise on the serosal side during polypectomy between air- and water-filled colon.

METHOD

Freshly harvested porcine colons were placed in a metal tray with cautery electrode pad attached to its bottom. An upper endoscope was used with a cap and a rubber band mounted to the distal end. A mucosal site was randomly selected and identified on its serosal surface with a marker while suction was applied. Suction was applied again and a ligation band was applied to create a polyp. A cautery snare grasped the artificial polyp just below the band. An assistant placed the tip of a thermometer at the marked site on the serosal surface to record the baseline temperature before cautery and the highest temperature during polypectomy. Seven polypectomies in air and underwater were performed.

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation) baseline temperature were 23.3 (0.6) °C and 23.4 (0.6) °C in the air and water groups, respectively. The maximum rise in temperature during polypectomy was 6.1 (4.5) °C and 1.4 (1.0) °C in the air and water groups, respectively (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The maximum temperature rise during polypectomy was significantly less when polypectomy was performed underwater, supporting the hypothesis that a heat-sink effect does exist during underwater polypectomy.

Endoscopic resection of large Paris 0-Ip pedunculated polyps: video demonstration of recent U.S. Multi-Society Task Force recommendations on resection and removal for general endoscopists

Video 1Illustration of general principles as well as different techniques that can be used for the ligation and resection of pedunculated polyps.

A novel technique using endoscopic band ligation for removal of long-stalked (>10 mm) pedunculated colon polyps: A prospective pilot study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic removal of large and thick-stalked pedunculated colonic polyps, often leads to massive hemorrhage. Several techniques to minimize this complication have not been widely adopted due to some caveats. In order to prevent postpolypectomy bleeding, we invented a novel technique to dissect long-stalked pedunculated colonic polyps using endoscopic band ligation (EBL) by laterally approaching the stalk.

METHODS

In this prospective single-center study, 17 pedunculated polyps in 15 patients were removed between April 2012 and January 2016. We targeted pedunculated polyps with a long stalk length (>10 mm) and a large head (>10 mm) located in the distal colon. After identifying lesions with a colonoscope, we reapproached the middle part of the stalk of the targeted polyp with an EBL-equipped gastroscope to ligate it. Snare polypectomy was performed just above the ligation site of the stalk.

RESULTS

EBL-assisted polypectomy removed all of the lesions successfully, which were confirmed pathologically. There was little technical difficulty associated with the endoscopic procedures, regardless of polyp size and stalk thickness, except for one case with a very large polyp that impeded the visualization of the ligation site. We observed a positive correlation between procedure time and the diameter of the head (spearman ρ = 0.52, P = 0.034). After dissection of the polyp, the EBL bands remained fastened to the dissected stalks in all cases. There was no complication associated with polypectomy for 1 month.

CONCLUSION

EBL-assisted polypectomy is an easy, safe, and effective technique to remove long-stalked pedunculated colonic polyps without postpolypectomy bleeding.

Personalizing Polypectomy Techniques Based on Polyp Characteristics

Polypectomy is an essential skill for all endoscopists performing lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. Different polypectomy tools and techniques have evolved and it is important that endoscopists are familiar with these so they can select the most appropriate technique for each polyp. This narrative review updates the different concepts in tailoring polypectomy technique to the characteristics of polyps. Effective polypectomy requires different components, including the following: careful evaluation of the polyp; decision making about optimal polyp management; actual polypectomy, which includes careful positioning of the endoscope and polyp; and postpolypectomy evaluation of the results (for completeness of resection and prophylaxis of complications).

Usefulness of epinephrine-added injection solution to reduce procedure time for gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and study aims  Epinephrine-added submucosal injection solution is used to facilitate hemostasis of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and to prevent delayed bleeding of large pedunculated colorectal lesions. However, its benefit in gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC) is unclear. The effectiveness of epinephrine-added injection solution for outcomes of gastric ESD was examined using propensity score matching analysis. Patients and methods  A total of 1,599 patients with solitary EGC (83 with non-epinephrine-added solution and 1,516 with epinephrine-added solution) between 2011 and 2018 were enrolled. Propensity scores were calculated to balance the distribution of baseline characteristics: age, sex, tumor location, specimen size, presence of ulcer scar, tumor depth, histological tumor type, and operators' experience, and 1:3 matching was performed. En bloc resection rate, mean procedure time, delayed bleeding rate, and perforation rate were compared between the non-epinephrine (n = 79) and epinephrine (n = 237) groups. Results  Mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the epinephrine group than in the non-epinephrine group (60 vs. 78 min, P  < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the rate of en bloc resection (both 99 %), incidence of delayed bleeding (both 6 %), or perforation (0 vs. 0.8 %) between the two groups. In multiple linear regression analysis, use of epinephrine-added solution was independently associated with short procedure time ( P  < 0.001) after adjustment for other covariates. Conclusion  The results suggest that epinephrine-added injection solution is useful for reduction of gastric ESD procedure time, warranting validation in a randomized controlled trial.

Prophylactic clip application for large pedunculated polyps before snare polypectomy may decrease immediate postpolypectomy bleeding

BACKGROUND

Although prophylactic clip application before polypectomy may prevent postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB), the usefulness of prophylactic clipping in the treatment of large pedunculated polyps is controversial in some prospective randomized studies. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clip application and to investigate the predictors of PPB in large pedunculated colorectal polyps.

METHODS

A total of 137 pedunculated polyps (size ≥1 cm) in 116 patients were prospectively included and randomized into group A (with clipping) and group B (without clipping), and resected. The occurrences of immediate PPB (graded 1-4) and delayed PPB were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven polyps were allocated in group A and 70 polyps in group B. In both groups, the median polyp diameter was 15 mm (P = 0.173) and the median stalk diameter was 3 mm (P = 0.362). Twenty-eight (20.4%) immediate PPB episodes in 137 polyps occurred, 6 (9.0%) in group A and 22 (31.4%) in group B (P = 0.001). However, the occurrence of delayed PPB was not different between the groups (P = 0.943). Prophylactic clip application decreased the occurrence of immediate PPB (odds ratio 0.215, 95% confidence interval 0.081-0.571). Moreover, polyp size ≥20 mm and stalk diameter ≥ 4 mm increased the risk of immediate PPB.

CONCLUSIONS

Clip application before polypectomy of ≥1 cm pedunculated polyps is effective in decreasing the occurrence of immediate PPB. Thus, clip application should be considered before performing snare polypectomy, especially for large polyps with a thick stalk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This research was studied a prospective maneuver and enrolled in a registry of clinical trials run by United States National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results system ID: NCT01437631). This study was registered on September 19, 2011.

[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.

Endoscopic Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding

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

A systematic description of the post-EMR defect to identify risk factors for clinically significant post-EMR bleeding in the colon

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) is the most-frequent serious adverse event after EMR of large laterally spreading colonic lesions (LSLs). There is no proven prophylactic therapy, and it remains a significant drawback of EMR. We aimed to systematically describe and evaluate the features of the post-EMR mucosal defect (PED) and their relationship to CSPEB.

METHODS

A prospective study of LSLs referred for EMR at a tertiary center was performed. PEDs without visible features were recorded as bland blue. Nonbland blue (NBB) PED features included size, number, and herniation of submucosal vessels and presence of submucosal hemorrhage, fibrosis, fat, and exposed muscle. NBB PEDs were analyzed for association with CSPEB, defined as bleeding occurring after completion of the procedure necessitating readmission or reintervention.

RESULTS

From April 2012 to May 2017, 501 lesions in 501 patients were eligible for analysis. The frequency of CSPEB was 30 of 501 (6.0%). More than or equal to 3 visible vessels was a significant predictor of CSPEB (P = .016). None of the following showed a significant correlation with CSPEB: presence of visible vessels, their diameter, herniation, or other nonvascular PED features. Submucosal vessels were more common in the left-sided colon segment (88.6% vs 78.3%, P = .004) and were significantly larger (20.8% vs 12.1% ≥1 mm, P = .037), more numerous (median 4 vessels [interquartile range, 2-7] vs 2 vessels [interquartile range, 1-4], P < .001), and more often herniated (32% vs 22.2%, P = .022).

CONCLUSIONS

More than or equal to 3 visible vessels within the PED may be predictive for CSPEB and may define a target group for real-time prophylactic intervention. No other endoscopically visible features of the PEDs were predictive of CSPEB. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03117400.).

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.

Clinical guidelines for endoscopic mucosal resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions

This document summarizes the contents of the Clinical Guidelines for the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions that was developed by the working group of the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED of Endoscopic Resection). This document presents recommendations for the endoscopic management of superficial colorectal neoplastic lesions.

Current standards and new developments of colorectal polyp management and resection techniques

Colonoscopy and endoscopic removal of precancerous polyps play an important role in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Improved endoscopes and quality standards have led to an increasing polyp and adenoma detection rate. Optimal polyp resection techniques and management strategies are key for an effective colonoscopy practice. Areas covered: Strategies for how to improve diminutive polyp (polyps up to 5 mm in size) management are discussed because of their high prevalence. Systematic removal of diminutive polyps leads to increasing costs of colonoscopy practice, while the effect on colorectal cancer prevention might be negligible. Furthermore, polypectomy recommendations for mid-size and large polyps are provided. For all larger polyps larger, complete and safe resection is mandatory to avoid post colonoscopy cancers. The focus for managing such larger polyps is to use new techniques (i.e. cold snares) and to attempt complete removal and to reduce post-polypectomy complications. Expert commentary: The resect-and-discard strategy is a promising management strategy for diminutive polyps. However, modification of this approach might be required in order to make widespread adoption feasible. Cold snare polypectomy is a promising new approach for small polyp resection. For resection of large polyps adequate treatment recommendations with regard to endoscopic mucosal resection and complication prevention are provided.

Standardisation of polypectomy technique

There are several approaches to polypectomy for sessile polyps <20 mm and for pedunculated polyps. Recent evidence is leading towards standardisation of polypectomy technique. Key recent polypectomy developments include: 1. Use of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for sessile polyps <10 mm; 2. Use of hot snare polypectomy (HSP) following submucosal injection for sessile polyps sized 10-19 mm; 3. Piecemeal cold snare polypectomy (PCSP), with or without prior submucosal injection, for select sessile polyps sized 10-19 mm, where the potential risk for an adverse event is increased (e.g. polyps in the caecum or ascending colon, or patients with increased risk of post-polypectomy bleeding), and where the risk of submucosal invasion is low; 4. Avoidance of hot biopsy forceps (HBF); 5. Limiting the use of cold biopsy forceps (CBF) to the smallest of diminutive polyps, where CSP is not feasible; 6. Mechanical haemostasis prior to polypectomy for large pedunculated polyps with head ≥20 mm or stalk ≥10 mm.

Efficacy of submucosal epinephrine injection for the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Background

Bleeding is the most common major complication following colonoscopic polypectomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether submucosal epinephrine injections could prevent the occurrence of postpolypectomy bleeding.

Method

The dataset was defined by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane database for appropriate randomized controlled studies published before April 2015. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the preventative effect of submucosal epinephrine injection for overall, early, and delayed postpolypectomy bleeding.

Results

The final analysis examined the findings of six studies, with data from 1388 patients. The results demonstrated that prophylactic treatment with epinephrine injection significantly reduced the occurrence of overall (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.66; p = 0.0006) and early bleeding (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.69; p = 0.002). However, for delayed bleeding complications, epinephrine injections were not found to be any more effective than treatment with saline injection or no injection (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.11, 1.81; p = 0.26). Moreover, for patients with polyps larger than 20 mm, mechanical hemostasis devices (endoloops or clips) were found to be more effective than epinephrine injection in preventing overall bleeding (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.87; p = 0.03) and early bleeding (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.08, 1.02; p = 0.05). This was not established for delayed bleeding.

Conclusion

The routine use of prophylaxis submucosal epinephrine injection is safe and beneficial preventing postpolypectomy bleeding.

Endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps in patients on antiplatelet therapy: an evidence-based guidance for clinicians

Due to the rising prevalence of coronary heart disease, endoscopists are more frequently performing a polypectomy in patients on antiplatelet therapy (APT) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DATP). Despite the availability of several guidelines with regard to the management of antiplatelet drugs during the periprocedure period, there is still variability in the current clinical practice. This may be influenced by the low quality of the evidence supporting recommendations, because most of the studies dealing with APT and polypectomy are observational and retrospective, and include mainly small (< 10 mm) polyps. However, some recommendations can still be made. An estimation of the bleeding and thrombotic risk of the patient should be made in advance. In the case of DAPT the procedure should be postponed, at least until clopidogrel can be safely withheld. If possible, non-aspirin antiplatelet drugs should be withheld 5-7 days before the procedure. Polyp size is the main factor related with post-polypectomy bleeding and it is the factor that should drive clinical decisions regarding the resection method and the use of endoscopic prophylactic measures. Non-aspirin antiplatelet agents can be reintroduced 24-48 hours after the procedure. In conclusion, there is little data with regard to the management of DAPT in patients with a scheduled polypectomy. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to support clinical recommendations.

Complications of endoscopic polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the colon

Endoscopic resection (ER), including endoscopic polypectomy (EP), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used to remove superficial neoplasms from the colon. Snare resection is used for EP and EMR, whereas endoscopic knives are used to perform dissection in the submucosal space in ESD. 80-90% colonic polyps are <10 millimetres (mm) and are effectively managed by conventional EP. Increasingly cold snare polypectomy is preferred. Large laterally spreading lesions (LSLs) and sessile polyps ≥20 mm are primarily removed by EMR. ESD may be used when superficial invasive disease is suspected and for some LSLs, particularly non-granular subtypes. Resection of colonic lesions by ER is associated with a small but definite incidence of significant complications, most commonly bleeding and perforation. This review discusses complications of ER with a particular focus on their prevention, early recognition and management. In many cases, complications from all three procedures share similar mechanisms and management principles and these are described at the start of each section, followed by a description of specific aspects for individual procedures.

Update on Difficult Polypectomy Techniques

Endoscopists often encounter colon polyps that are technically difficult to resect. These lesions traditionally were managed surgically, with significant potential morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques and instruments have allowed endoscopists to safely and effectively remove colorectal lesions with high technical and clinical success and potentially avoid invasive surgery. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has gained acceptance as the first-line therapy for large colorectal lesions. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been reported to be associated with higher rate of en bloc resection and less risk of short-time recurrence, but with an increased risk of adverse events. Therefore, the role of colorectal ESD should be restricted to lesions with high-risk morphologic features of submucosal invasion. In this article, we review the recent literature on the endoscopic management of difficult colorectal neoplasms.

Comparison of Efficacy of Prophylactic Endoscopic Therapies for Postpolypectomy Bleeding in the Colorectum: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Although various endoscopic therapies have been suggested for preventing bleeding after colorectal polypectomy, the optimal therapy has yet to be fully clarified. We assessed the comparative efficacy of prophylactic therapies for postpolypectomy bleeding through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect comparisons.

METHODS

We searched for all relevant randomized controlled trials published up until January 2016 examining the effects of prophylactic therapy for bleeding after colorectal polypectomy. The types of prophylactic therapy were classified as mechanical therapy, epinephrine-saline injection therapy, coagulation therapy, combined therapy, or no prophylactic therapy. Combined therapy was defined as a combination of two or more types of therapy including mechanical therapy, epinephrine-saline injection therapy, and coagulation therapy. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis for all prophylactic therapies.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with 3,462 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with no prophylactic therapy, both epinephrine-saline injection and mechanical therapy showed superiority for preventing early postpolypectomy bleeding with a moderate quality of evidence (injection therapy, risk ratio (RR; 95% credible interval (CrI))=0.32 (0.11-0.67); mechanical therapy, RR (95% CrI)=0.13 (0.03-0.37)). Combined therapy did not show a statistically significant difference for decreasing the risk of early bleeding compared with injection or mechanical therapies, respectively (combined vs. injection therapy: RR (95% CrI)=0.35 (0.10-1.00); combined vs. mechanical therapy: RR (95% CrI)=0.88 (0.23-3.00)). In cases of delayed bleeding, no type of prophylactic therapy decreased the risk of bleeding compared with no prophylactic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Either mechanical therapy or injection therapy reduced the risk of early postpolypectomy bleeding. As for delayed bleeding, none of the prophylactic therapies was associated with a lower risk of bleeding compared with no prophylactic therapy.

Should prophylactic measures to prevent postpolypectomy bleeding after resection of large colorectal polyps be used?

Post-polypectomy bleeding after colonoscopy with resection of large colorectal polyps can cause significant morbidity (readmission for monitoring, transfusion, repeat endoscopy and therapy) and a significant cost to hospitals and insurers. Nevertheless prophylactic endoscopic measures could reduce risk of post-polypectomy bleeding. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening 30 databases, we identified two systematic reviews including 10 randomized trials. We combined the evidence using meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table following the GRADE approach. We concluded prophylactic endoscopic measures could be effective in reducing post-polypectomy bleeding after resection of large colorectal polyps.

Factors Associated With Recurrence of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma After Endoscopic Resection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Studies have identified risk factors for recurrence of advanced colorectal adenoma (ACA) after polypectomy, but the relative importance and interaction of these risk factors, and their potential impact on surveillance recommendations, are unclear. We aimed to develop a model to identify ACA features associated with risk of recurrence after polypectomy.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we collected data from 3360 patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy at University of Foggia from 2004 through 2008 and identified 746 patients with 1017 ACAs. We performed recursive partitioning analysis to identify factors associated with recurrence of ACA within 3 years after polypectomy.

RESULTS

Median ACA size was 16 mm (range, 8-34 mm) and median number was 1.5 (range, 1-2). Pedunculated, sessile, and nonpolypoid lesions accounted for 41.3%, 39.4%, and 19.3% of ACAs detected, respectively. Factors independently associated with local recurrence of ACA and metachronous distant polyps within 3 years after polypectomy included size and number of ACAs and grade of dysplasia. The recurrence rate was 4.2% in patients with a single ACA ≤15 mm without high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 21.3% in patients with HGD ≤15 mm, ACA without HGD >15 mm, or multiple ACAs without HGD ≤15 mm, and 57.9% in patients with HGD >15 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of 746 patients with ACA who underwent polypectomy and surveillance colonoscopy within 3 years, the recurrence rate was highest in those with HGD ≥15 mm. These patients might benefit from more intensive surveillance, whereas patients with a single ACA without HGD ≤15 mm are at lower risk for and could be considered for longer follow-up intervals.

A Scoring System to Determine Risk of Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Colorectal Lesions

BACKGROUND & AIMS

After endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal lesions, delayed bleeding is the most common serious complication, but there are no guidelines for its prevention. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with delayed bleeding that required medical attention after discharge until day 15 and develop a scoring system to identify patients at risk.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 1214 consecutive patients with nonpedunculated colorectal lesions 20 mm or larger treated by EMR (n = 1255) at 23 hospitals in Spain, from February 2013 through February 2015. Patients were examined 15 days after the procedure, and medical data were collected. We used the data to create a delayed bleeding scoring system, and assigned a weight to each risk factor based on the β parameter from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Patients were classified as being at low, average, or high risk for delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

Delayed bleeding occurred in 46 cases (3.7%, 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-4.9%). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with delayed bleeding included age ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.36; P < .01), American Society of Anesthesiologist classification scores of III or IV (OR, 1.90; P ≤ .05), aspirin use during EMR (OR, 3.16; P < .05), right-sided lesions (OR, 4.86; P < .01), lesion size ≥40 mm (OR, 1.91; P ≤ .05), and a mucosal gap not closed by hemoclips (OR, 3.63; P ≤ .01). We developed a risk scoring system based on these 6 variables that assigned patients to the low-risk (score, 0-3), average-risk (score, 4-7), or high-risk (score, 8-10) categories with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83). In these groups, the probabilities of delayed bleeding were 0.6%, 5.5%, and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions is 3.7%. We developed a risk scoring system based on 6 factors that determined the risk for delayed bleeding (receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.77). The factors most strongly associated with delayed bleeding were right-sided lesions, aspirin use, and mucosal defects not closed by hemoclips. Patients considered to be high risk (score, 8-10) had a 40% probability of delayed bleeding.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection of large colonic polyps

Almost all large and complex colorectal polyps can now be resected endoscopically. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (PEMR) is an established technique with fairly low complication risk and good short-term and medium-term outcomes. Several modifications to the basic injection and snare technique have been developed contributing to safer and more complete resections. Delayed bleeding requiring reintervention is the most troublesome complication in 2-7% of patients, particularly in those with comorbidities and large, right-sided polyps. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become popular in Japan and has theoretical advantages over PEMR in providing a complete, en bloc excision for accurate histological staging and reduced local recurrence. These advantages come at the cost of a more complex, expensive and time-consuming procedure with a higher risk of perforation, particularly early in the procedure learning curve. These factors have contributed to the slow adoption of ESD in the West and the challenge to develop new devices and endoscopic platforms that will make ESD easier and safer. Currently, ESD indications are limited to large rectal lesions, in which procedural complications are easily managed, and for colorectal polyps with a high risk of containing tiny foci of early submucosally invasive cancer, whereby ESD may be curative compared with PEMR.

Large Colorectal Lesions: Evaluation and Management

In the last years, a distinctive interest has been raised on large polypoid and non-polypoid colorectal tumors, and specially on flat neoplastic lesions ≥20 mm tending to grow laterally, the so called laterally spreading tumors (LST). Real or virtual chromoendoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance should be considered for the estimation of submucosal invasion of these neoplasms. Lesions suitable for endoscopic resection are those confined to the mucosa or selected cases with submucosal invasion ≤1000 μm. Polypectomy or endoscopic mucosal resection remain a first-line therapy for large colorectal neoplasms, whereas endoscopic submucosal dissection in high-volume centers or surgery should be considered for large LSTs for which en bloc resection is mandatory.

Solutions for submucosal injection in endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Submucosal injection is standard practice in endoscopic mucosal resection of gastrointestinal lesions. Several solutions are used. Our aim was to systematically review their efficacy and safety.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using a random effects model of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE. Studies in animal models were qualitatively assessed for efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 54 studies were qualitatively assessed. Eleven RCTs were analyzed, two of which were on endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The quantitative synthesis included nine RCTs on endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), comprising 792 subjects and 793 lesions. Mean lesion size was 20.9 mm (range 8.5 - 46 mm). A total of 209 lesions were randomized to sodium hyaluronate (SH) vs normal saline (NS), 72 to 50 % dextrose (D50) vs NS, 82 to D50 vs SH, 43 to succinylated gelatin, 25 to hydroxyethyl starch and 36 to fibrinogen. In total, 385 were randomized to NS as controls. NS and SH are the best studied solutions and seem to be equally effective in achieving complete resection (OR 1.09; 95 %CI 0.82, 1.45). No solution was proven to be superior in complete resection rate, post-polypectomy bleeding or coagulation syndrome/perforation incidence. Many solutions have been tested in animal studies and most seem more effective for mucosal elevation than NS.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several solutions in clinical use and many more under research, but most are poorly studied. SH seems to be clinically equivalent to NS. There are no significant differences in post-polypectomy complications. Larger RCTs are needed to determine any small differences that may exist between solutions.

Improving the utility of colonoscopy: Recent advances in practice

Colonoscopy is a frequently performed diagnostic and therapeutic test and the primary screening tool in several nationalized bowel cancer screening programs. There has been a considerable focus on maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. This has occurred in four key areas: Optimizing patient selection to reduce unnecessary or low yield colonoscopy has offered cost-benefit improvements in population screening. Improving quality assurance, through the development of widely accepted quality metrics for use in individual practice and the research setting, has offered measurable improvements in colonoscopic yield. Significant improvements have been demonstrated in colonoscopic technique, from the administration of preparation to the techniques employed during withdrawal of the colonoscope. Improved techniques to avoid post-procedural complications have also been developed-further maximizing the utility of colonoscopy. The aim of this review is to summarize the recent evidence-based advances in colonoscopic practice that contribute to the optimal practice of colonoscopy.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps

These guidelines provide an evidence-based framework for the management of patients with large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), in addition to identifying key performance indicators (KPIs) that permit the audit of quality outcomes. These are areas not previously covered by British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Guidelines.A National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant BSG guideline development process was used throughout and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to structure the guideline development process. A systematic review of literature was conducted for English language articles up to May 2014 concerning the assessment and management of LNPCPs. Quality of evaluated studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist System. Proposed recommendation statements were evaluated by each member of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) on a scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) with >80% agreement required for consensus to be reached. Where consensus was not reached a modified Delphi process was used to re-evaluate and modify proposed statements until consensus was reached or the statement discarded. A round table meeting was subsequently held to finalise recommendations and to evaluate the strength of evidence discussed. The GRADE tool was used to assess the strength of evidence and strength of recommendation for finalised statements.KPIs, a training framework and potential research questions for the management of LNPCPs were also developed. It is hoped that these guidelines will improve the assessment and management of LNPCPs.

A case of hemorrhage after endoscopic mucosal resection of a large colonic polyp

Large colonic polyps (with a diameter larger than 2 cm) are associated with an increased risk of malignancy. Endoscopic resection is the first line treatment; however, there is a risk of bleeding. We reported a 56-year-old man with a large pedunculated polyp (3.0 cm × 3.5 cm) located between the rectum and the sigmoid. After endoscopic mucosal resection, the patient suffered from continuous hemorrhage at the wound site. He was then treated by argon plasma coagulation (APC), bipolar coagulation and hemoclip hemostasis. Unfortunately, all these attempts ended in failure. Finally, an operation was performed and a segment of the colon was removed to save his life. From this case we can learn that we should use endoscopic nylon loop as much as possible when treating large pedunculated polyps. In addition, we should do our best to stop the bleeding at the same time.

Comparison of clipping with and without epinephrine injection for the prevention of post-polypectomy bleeding in pedunculated colon polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is the most common adverse event of colonoscopic polypectomy, especially in cases with large pedunculated polyps. To minimize the risk of PPB, several endoscopic preventive methods have been performed. The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the rates of PPB following single (clipping alone) and combined (clipping plus epinephrine-saline injection) methods in prevention of PPB in large pedunculated polyps.

METHODS

Adult patients with pedunculated colorectal polyps with heads ≥ 10 mm were prospectively enrolled from March 2011 to January 2013. Patients were randomized to receive treatment of either clips alone (group A) or clips plus injection of epinephrine-saline (group B) prior to a conventional polypectomy. PPB rate in both groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 148 patients with 173 pedunculated colorectal polyps were enrolled. Groups A and B each had 74 patients, with 83 and 90 polyps, respectively. The mean head diameters were 17.2 ± 6.6 and 17.5 ± 6.7 mm in groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.748). Immediate PPB (IPPB) occurred in 10 cases (12.0%) from group A and 13 cases (14.4%) from group B (P = 0.64). There were no cases of delayed PPB or perforation. Multivariate analysis showed that inadequate bowel preparation and large head diameter of polyp were independent risk factors for IPPB.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of IPPB is relatively high in cases with large pedunculated polyps, but these polyps can be successfully resected by snare polypectomy following use of the single prophylactic clipping method.

Management of polypectomy complications

The 2 most significant complications of colonoscopy with polypectomy are bleeding and perforation. Incidence rates for bleeding (0.1%-0.6%) and perforation (0.7%-0.9%) are generally low. Recognition of pertinent risk factors helps to prevent these complications, which can be grouped into patient-related, polyp-related, and technique/device-related factors. Endoscopists should be equipped to manage bleeding and perforation. Currently available devices and techniques are reviewed to achieve hemostasis and close colon perforations.

Prophylactic endoscopic coagulation to prevent bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large sessile colon polyps

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Clinically significant postendoscopic mucosal resection bleeding (CSPEB) is the most frequent significant complication of wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of advanced mucosal neoplasia (sessile or laterally spreading colorectal lesions > 20 mm). CSPEB requires resource-intensive management and there is no strategy for preventing it. We investigated whether prophylactic endoscopic coagulation (PEC) reduces the incidence of CSPEB.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial of 347 patients (mean age, 67.1 y; 55.3% with proximal colonic lesions) undergoing WF-EMR for advanced mucosal neoplasia at 3 Australian tertiary referral centers. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1) to groups receiving PEC (n = 172) or no additional therapy (n = 175, controls). PEC was performed with coagulating forceps, applying low-power coagulation to nonbleeding vessels in the resection defect. CSPEB was defined as bleeding requiring admission to the hospital. The primary end point was the proportion of CSPEB.

RESULTS

Patients in each group were similar at baseline. CSPEB occurred in 9 patients receiving PEC (5.2%) and 14 controls (8.0%; P = .30). CSPEB was associated significantly with proximal colonic location on multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 3.08; P = .03). Compared with the proximal colon, there was a significantly greater number (3.8 vs 2.1; P = .002) and mean size (0.5-1 vs 0.3-0.5 mm; P = .04) of visible vessels in the distal colon.

CONCLUSIONS

PEC does not significantly decrease the incidence of CSPEB after WF-EMR. There were significantly more and larger vessels in the WF-EMR mucosal defect of distal colonic lesions, yet CSPEB was more frequent with proximal colonic lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01368731.

Advances, problems, and complications of polypectomy

The major role of colonoscopy with polypectomy in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer has been firmly established. Yet there is cause to be uneasy. One of the most striking recent findings is that there is an alarmingly high incomplete polyp removal rate. This phenomenon, together with missed polyps during screening colonoscopy, is thought to be responsible for the majority of interval cancers. Knowledge of serrated polyps needs to broaden as well, since they are quite often missed or incompletely removed. Removal of small and diminutive polyps is almost devoid of complications. Cold snare polypectomy seems to be the best approach for these lesions, with biopsy forcep removal reserved only for the tiniest of polyps. Hot snare or hot biopsy forcep removal of these lesions is no longer recommended. Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection have proven to be effective in the removal of large colorectal lesions, avoiding surgery in the majority of patients, with acceptably low complication rates. Variants of these approaches, as well as new hybrid techniques, are being currently tested. In this paper, we review the current status of the different approaches in removing polypoid and nonpolypoid lesions of the colon, their complications, and future directions in the prevention of colorectal cancer.

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage following removal of large polyps using mechanical haemostasis or epinephrine: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Postpolypectomy haemorrhage (PPH) is a known adverse event that can occur following polypectomy, occurring in 0.3-6.1% of cases. Previous meta-analysis has included small polyps, which are less likely to bleed, and less amenable to some methods of mechanical haemostasis. No comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of this topic is available. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials and a cost-benefit analysis of prophylactic haemostasis in PPH.

METHODS

A total of 3092 abstracts from prospective trials conducted in human colonoscopic polypectomy were screened. Outpatients undergoing polypectomy in seven suitable studies (1426 episodes), without polyposis syndromes or bleeding diathesis, were identified. The interventions of prophylactic haemostatic measures (clips, loops, and/or adrenaline injection) to prevent PPH were assessed. The main outcome measurements were PPH measured by haematochezia or drop in haematocrit >10% or haemoglobin >1 g/dl. Risk ratio and number needed to treat (NNT) were generated using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Comparing any prophylactic haemostasis to none, the pooled risk ratio for PPH was 0.35 (0.21-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT was 13.6, and cost to prevent one PPH was USD652. Using adrenaline alone vs. no prophylactic haemostasis revealed a pooled risk ratio of 0.37 (0.20-0.66; p = 0.001), NNT 14.0, cost to prevent one PPH USD382. Any prophylactic mechanical haemostasis compared to adrenaline produced a RR for PPH of 0.28 (0.14-0.57; p < 0.0001), NNT 12.3, and cost to prevent one PPH USD1368.

CONCLUSIONS

Adrenaline injection or mechanical haemostasis reduces the risk of PPH. Routine prophylactic measures to reduce PPH for polyps larger than 10 mm are potentially cost effective, although more thorough cost-benefit modelling is required.

Complications of colonoscopy

Colonoscopy is a relatively invasive modality for the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal disease and for the prevention or early detection of colorectal neoplasia. Millions of colonoscopies are performed each year in the United States by endoscopists with varying levels of skill in colons that present varying levels of challenge. Although better scope technology has made colonoscopy gentler and more accurate, the sheer number of examinations performed means that complications inevitably occur. This article considers the most common complications of colonoscopy, and advises how to minimize their incidence and how to treat them if they do occur.

Colon polypectomy: a review of routine and advanced techniques

The value of performing comprehensive screening colonoscopy with complete colon polypectomy is widely accepted. Colon cancer is a significant cause of worldwide mortality and prospective studies have proven that colonoscopic polypectomy reduces both the incidence and mortality related to this disease. Over the past few decades the array of instruments and techniques have greatly expanded to assist with the safe endoscopic removal of colon polyps. This article will review the published literature regarding efficacy and safety of standard polypectomy techniques such as snare polypectomy, electrocautery, and endoscopic mucosal resection along with newer techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection and combined laparoscopic techniques.

Risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding: how to minimize your patients' risk

PURPOSE

Secondary bleeding after colonoscopic polypectomy is a serious complication. Most studies show polyp size, location, and shape to be important risk factors but other factors may allow refinement of risk. The aim of this study is to look for other factors associated with delayed postpolypectomy bleeding.

METHODS

This case-matched study compares patients who developed postpolypectomy bleeding with those who underwent uncomplicated polypectomy. Matching was performed for known risk factors: polyp size, location and shape, with a ratio of three controls to one subject.

RESULTS

Postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 19/494 patients with polyps >2.0 cm diameter (3.8%) and 11/4161 patients with polyps <2.0 cm (0.3%). There was a median interval of 3 days (range 0-9 days) from polypectomy to hemorrhage. Twenty-five patients were readmitted to this institution. Ten (40.0%) were transfused and 19 (76.0%) were re-colonoscoped, with 13 needing either cautery (n = 7) or adrenaline injection (n = 6). Ninety patients were selected as controls, matched for polyp size, location, and shape. Mean age at polypectomy was 69.9 ± 9.2 years for patients and 64.9 ± 12.2 for controls (p = 0.042); 63.3% subjects were male, compared to 47.8% of controls (p = 0.140). Univariate analysis showed that older age, piecemeal polypectomy, need for additional sedation, concurrent diverticulosis and intraprocedural bleeding were significantly associated with increased risk of delayed bleeding. The associations between delayed bleeding and additional sedation, concurrent diverticulosis and intraprocedural bleeding were confirmed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Difficult colonoscopy and intraprocedural bleeding identify patients with a particularly high risk of secondary postpolypectomy bleeding. Preventive measures should be considered in such cases.