Prophylactic clip closure reduced the risk of delayed postpolypectomy hemorrhage: experience in 277 clipped large sessile or flat colorectal lesions and 247 control lesions

Endoscopic Clipping Versus Suturing for Mucosotomy Closure in E-POEM and G-POEM: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims: Endoscopic clipping is the standard method for mucosotomy closure in per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM). Concerns remain regarding potential leaks and long-term complications. This meta-analysis compares the technical success rates and outcomes of endoscopic clipping and suturing for mucosotomy closure in E-POEM/G-POEM. Methods: A systematic search of databases for studies comparing endoscopic clipping and suturing in E-POEM/G-POEM was conducted. The primary outcomes were technical success rates, and the secondary outcomes were cost, procedure time, and complications. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analysis were performed. Results: Three studies with a total of 91 patients were included. The technical success rates were similar between suturing and clipping, with a success rate of 100% (48/48) for suturing and 94.4% (41/43) for clipping (odds ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.89–1.19, p = 0.50). There was no significant difference in procedure time between the two methods (SMD −0.73; CI: −1.70 to 0.23; p = 0.13). The cost of suturing was higher on average (mean: $1751, range: $873–$2353) compared to clipping (mean: $898, range: $703–$1083), but the difference was not statistically significant (SMD 1.85, CI −5.05 to 1.35, p = 0.25) with high heterogeneity. Complications for clipping and suturing were also comparable. Conclusions: Both endoscopic clipping and suturing achieve successful mucosotomy closure in E-POEM/G-POEM without any significant difference in the cost and the time between the two closure methods. Further investigation with larger, randomized, controlled trials are necessary to determine their roles in routine practice.

Post-polypectomy colorectal bleeding: current strategies and the way forward

Post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) bleeding, or clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, is influenced by factors such as polyp size, right-sided colonic lesions, laterally spreading tumors, anticoagulant use, and comorbidities like cardiovascular or chronic renal disease. The optimal prophylactic therapy for post-EMR bleeding remains unknown, with no consensus on specific criteria for its application. Moreover, prophylactic measures, including clipping, suturing, and coagulation, have produced mixed results. Selective clipping in high-risk patients is cost-effective, whereas universal clipping is not. Studies and meta-analyses indicate that routine prophylactic clipping does not generally reduce post-polypectomy bleeding but may be beneficial in cases of large proximal lesions. Some studies have revealed that the post-polypectomy bleeding risk after EMR of transverse colonic lesions is lower than that of the ascending colon and caecum, suggesting limited efficacy of clipping in the transverse colon. Cost-effectiveness studies support selective clipping in high-risk groups, and newer static agents such as PuraStat are alternatives; however, their cost-effectiveness is undetermined. Further research is required to establish clear guidelines and refine prophylactic strategies to prevent post-EMR bleeding.

Efficacy of alternate mucosa-submucosa clip closure in preventing postoperative adverse events for patients with gastric mucosal lesions after endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the first-line treatment for gastric mucosal lesions. The artificial ulcers caused by ESD can lead to bleeding, perforation, and other adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of alternate mucosa-submucosa clip in preventing adverse events following ESD for gastric mucosal lesions.

DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective observational study.

METHODS

Data from 924 patients who underwent ESD for gastric mucosal lesions were retrospectively collected and categorized into completely closed and unclosed groups based on postoperative wound management. The incidence of adverse events and postoperative wound healing rate at 1 and 3 months were compared between the groups, and the factors related to delayed bleeding after ESD were analyzed.

RESULTS

The rate of delayed hemorrhage was lower in the completely closed group than in the unclosed group (0.8% vs 7.6%; p < 0.001), and subgroup analysis showed that this effect was consistent across all subgroups. The postoperative abdominal pain score was lower in the completely closed group than in the unclosed group (0 vs 2, p < 0.001). One month postoperatively, the wound healing rate was higher in the completely closed group (77.6% vs 55.1%; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that the presence of ulcers or scars on the lesion surface, and lesions located in the lower one-third of the stomach were risk factors for postoperative bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Application of alternate mucosa-submucosa clip closing the wound of ESD reduced the risk of postoperative bleeding, alleviated postoperative abdominal pain, and promoted artificial wound healing.

Prospective, randomized controlled study evaluating a double-balloon interventional endoscopic platform for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (with video)

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be challenging and time-consuming. A double-balloon interventional platform (DBIP) was designed to assist with navigation, stabilization, traction, and device delivery during complex colorectal polypectomy. We compared traditional ESD (T-ESD) with DBIP-assisted ESD (DBIP-ESD) in a prospective, randomized trial.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal polyps ≥2 cm were randomly assigned (1:1) to DBIP-ESD or T-ESD. The primary study endpoint was the mean total procedure time difference between groups. Secondary endpoints were intraprocedural time points, en bloc resection rate, procedure cost, adverse events, and 3-month assessment. A sample size of 200 subjects for ≥80% power was calculated. Interim analysis for early study termination was planned at 70% enrollment if the primary endpoint was met (P ≤ .05).

RESULTS

One hundred forty-seven patients were enrolled between February 2019 and February 2020. Seven patients dropped out, and the interim analysis was performed on 140 patients (71 DBIP-ESD, 69 T-ESD). Demographics, comorbidities, and lesion size, location, and classification were similar between groups. The mean procedure time decreased with DBIP-ESD (88.6 ± 42.7 minutes) versus T-ESD (139.5 ± 83.2 minutes; difference of ∼51 minutes [36.5%]; P < .001], with procedural savings of $610.16 (11.4%) per patient after DBIP cost. The DBIP increased dissection speed by 49.0% (15.1 ± 8.0 vs 7.7 ± 6.6 cm2/h, P < .001). En bloc resection was superior with the addition of DBIP (97.2% vs 87.0%, P = .030). The mean navigation time with DBIP-ESD for sutured defect closure decreased by 7.7 minutes (P < .001). There were no adverse events in the DBIP-ESD group.

CONCLUSIONS

DBIP-ESD decreased the total procedure time, improved the en bloc resection rate, and facilitated sutured defect closure, making DBIP a promising and cost-effective tool to improve colorectal ESD adoption. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03846609.).

Association between prophylactic closure of mucosal defect and delayed adverse events after endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the potential of prophylactic closure of mucosal defects to prevent adverse events following endoscopic resection of superficial layers of the gastrointestinal (GI) wall.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for studies eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis from inception to February 2022.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We compared the effects of closure versus non-closure of mucosal defects with respect to adverse events including delayed bleeding, delayed perforation and postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome (PPCS). We used a random-effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed based on gastrointestinal sites, surgical procedures and study designs.

RESULTS

In total, this study includes 11 383 patients from 28 studies. For delayed bleeding, closure group was associated with a lower incidence (Risk Ratio [RR]: 0.40, 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 0.53, p<0.001; I2=25%) and consistent results were observed in the subgroups. Also, for delayed perforation, a combined analysis of all sites and surgical methods showed a protective effect of prophylactic closure of mucosal defects (RR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.82, p=0.01; I2=0%). Similar results were observed in the subgroup analyses, despite the wide CIs. Regarding the PPCS, neither the pooled RRs nor the subgroup analyses showed significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic closure of mucosal defects is beneficial in reducing the incidence of delayed bleeding and delayed perforation after endoscopic resection, but there is no significant difference in reducing the incidence of PPCS.

Splenic rupture following endoscopic mucosal resection: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

This study aims to highlight the rare but severe complication of splenic rupture following colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), advocating for increased vigilance during procedures near the splenic flexure.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We present a case report of a 66-year-old woman who experienced persistent abdominal pain after undergoing EMR for an adenomatous lesion in the distal transverse colon.

DIAGNOSES

The diagnosis of splenic rupture was established following her symptoms and clinical evaluation.

INTERVENTIONS

Active conservative management was implemented after diagnosis.

OUTCOMES

The patient's recovery underscores the importance of prompt diagnosis and careful monitoring.

LESSONS

Although splenic rupture after EMR is extremely rare, it is a serious and potentially life-threatening complication. When obtaining informed consent, it is important to emphasize not only common complications like bleeding and perforation but also the risk of splenic injury. Physicians should select appropriate instruments and carefully adjust the angle and force of needle insertion, avoiding excessively long needles and vertical insertion. The procedure should be performed gently to minimize the risk of splenic rupture. For lesions near the splenic flexure, if postoperative abdominal pain occurs, regardless of left shoulder pain, splenic rupture should be considered, and a computed tomography scan promptly performed. Postoperatively, physicians should closely monitor vital signs and repeatedly check blood counts and coagulation parameters. Treatment should be tailored to the splenic injury's extent and the patient's overall condition, with immediate surgery if necessary. High-risk patients should be regularly followed up and instructed to monitor for physical changes. Endoscopists should remain vigilant during procedures, fully understanding potential complications, and closely monitoring the patient's condition postoperatively. This vigilance is key to preventing severe complications and ensuring optimal outcomes.

The Use of Clips to Prevent Post-Polypectomy Bleeding: A Clinical Review

GOALS

The goal of this clinical review is to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the utility of prophylactic clips in reducing postpolypectomy bleeding and to provide an expert statement regarding their appropriateness in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy enables the identification and removal of premalignant and malignant lesions through polypectomy, yet complications including postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) can arise. While various studies have explored applying clips prophylactically to prevent PPB, their effectiveness remains uncertain.

STUDY

A literature search conducted in PubMed and Embase identified 671 publications discussing clip use postpolypectomy; 67 were found to be relevant after screening, reporting outcomes related to PPB. Data related to clip utilization, polyp characteristics, and adverse events were extracted and discussed.

RESULTS

The current literature suggests that prophylactic clipping is most beneficial for nonpedunculated polyps ≥20 mm, especially those in the proximal colon. The utility of clipping smaller polyps and those in the distal colon remains less clear. Antithrombotic medication usage, particularly anticoagulants, has been linked to an increased risk of bleeding, prompting consideration for clip placement in this patient subgroup. While cost-effectiveness analyses may indicate potential savings, the decision to clip should be tailored to individual patient factors and polyp characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Current research suggests that the application of prophylactic clips can be particularly beneficial in preventing delayed bleeding after removal of large nonpedunculated polyps, especially for those in the proximal colon and in patients on antithrombotic medications. In addition, for large pedunculated polyps prophylactic clipping is most effective at controlling immediate bleeding.

Cold Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (c-EMR) of Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps ≥20 mm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that cold endoscopic mucosal resection (c-EMR) can effectively treat large colorectal polyps. We aim to appraise the current literature and evaluate outcomes following c-EMR for nonpedunculated colonic polyps ≥20 mm.

METHODS

Major databases were searched. Primary outcomes included recurrence rate and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine articles were included in the final analysis, which included 817 patients and 1077 colorectal polyps. Average polyp size was 28.8 (±5.1) mm. The pooled recurrence rate of polyps of any histology at 4 to 6 months was 21.0% (95% CI: 9.0%-32.0%, P <0.001, I2 =97.3, P <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that recurrence was 10% for proximal lesions (95% CI: 0.0%-20.0%, P =0.054, I2 =93.7%, P =0.054) and 9% for distal lesions (95% CI: 2.0%-21.0%, P =0.114, I2 =95.8%, P =0.114). Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed that recurrence was 12% for adenoma (95% CI: 4.0%-19.0%, P =0.003, I2 =98.0%, P =0.003), and 3% for sessile serrated polyps (95% CI: 1.0%-5.0%, P =0.002, I2 =34.4%, P =0.002). Post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 1% (n=8/817) of patients, whereas abdominal pain occurred in 0.2% (n=2/817) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

C-EMR for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm shows an excellent safety profile with a very low rate of delayed bleeding as well as significantly less recurrence for sessile serrated polyps than adenomas.

Audit of hemostatic clip use after colorectal polyp resection in an academic endoscopy unit

Background and study aims Prophylactic closure of endoscopic resection defects reduces delayed hemorrhage after resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions ≥ 20 mm that are located proximal to the splenic flexure and removed by electrocautery. The risk of delayed hemorrhage after cold (without electrocautery) resection is much lower, and prophylactic clip closure after cold resection is generally unnecessary. The aim of this study was to audit clip use after colorectal polyp resection in routine outpatient colonoscopies at two outpatient centers within an academic medical center. Patients referred for resection of known lesions were excluded. Patients and methods Retrospective chart analysis was performed as part of a quality review of physician adherence to screening and post-polypectomy surveillance intervals. Results Among 3784 total lesions resected cold by 29 physicians, clips were placed after cold resection on 41.7% of 12 lesions ≥ 20 mm, 19.3% of 207 lesions 10 to 19 mm in size, and 2.8% of 3565 lesions 1 to 9 mm in size. Three physicians placed clips after cold resection of lesions 1 to 9 mm in 18.8%, 25.5%, and 45.0% of cases. These physicians accounted for 8.1% of 1- to 9-mm resections, but 69.7% of clips placed in this size range. Electrocautery was used for 3.1% of all resections. Clip placement overall after cold resection (3.9%) was much lower than after resection with electrocautery (71.1%), but 62.4% of all clips placed were after cold resection. Conclusions Audits of clip use in an endoscopy practice can reveal surprising findings, including high and variable rates of unnecessary use after cold resection. Audit can potentially reduce unnecessary costs, carbon emissions, and plastic waste.

Adaption of novel clip-closure technique for large mucosal defects after EMR of a colon laterally spreading tumor using standard hemostatic clips

Video 1EMR of a large colonic polyp with defect closure using Resolution 360 ULTRA Clips (Boston Scientific, Boston, Mass, USA) and the Anchor, Mobilize, and Close approach.

Through-the-scope clip retention rates and performance in a porcine model

Background and study aims Limited comparative data exist to guide optimal through-the-scope (TTS) clip selection. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, retention, and safety of three industry-leading TTS clips on tissue that mimics common clinical scenarios. Methods A survival study involving six domestic pigs was undertaken. Three commonly used clip models were selected: Assurance (STERIS, Mentor, Ohio, United States), Resolution (Boston Scientific, Boston, Massachusetts, United States), and SureClip (Micro-Tech, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States). To mimic clinical practice, the following scenarios were assessed: (1) normal mucosa; (2) cold snare resection; and (3) hot mucosal resection simulating fibrotic ulcers. Deployment of clips was randomized to target sites. Repeat endoscopy was performed 2 weeks following placement. Endoscopists rated the ease of use of clip placement on a Likert scale of 1 to 5. Results Fifty-four clips (18 Assurance, 18 Resolution, and 18 SureClip) were placed in six pigs. Mucosal healing was noted at all sites on follow up. Overall retention was nine of 18 (50.0%) SureClip, 10 of 18 (55.6%) Assurance, and 13 of 18 (72.2%) Resolution ( P =0.369). There was no difference in clip retention on normal and cold snare resection sites; however, clip retention was significantly higher for Resolution clips on fibrotic ulcers (50.0% versus 0% for Assurance and 0% SureClip, P =0.03). No adverse events were reported. Ease of use was equivalent across all models. Conclusions All clips were equivalent in efficacy and safety with successful clip deployment and mucosal healing. Overall retention rate was low for fibrotic tissue, with an improved retention rate observed with Resolution clips.

Low delayed bleeding and high complete closure rate of mucosal defects with the novel through-the-scope dual-action tissue clip after endoscopic resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Complete closure after endoscopic resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs) can reduce delayed bleeding but is challenging with conventional through-the-scope (TTS) clips alone. The novel dual-action tissue (DAT) clip has clip arms that open and close independently of each other, facilitating tissue approximation. We aimed to evaluate the rate of complete closure and delayed bleeding with the DAT clip after endoscopic resection of LNPCLs.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent defect closure with the DAT clip after EMR or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of LNPCLs ≥20 mm from July 2022 to May 2023. Delayed bleeding was defined as a bleeding event requiring hospitalization, blood transfusion, or any intervention within 30 days after the procedure. Complete closure was defined as apposition of mucosal defect margins without visible submucosal areas <3 mm along the closure line.

RESULTS

One hundred seven patients (median age, 64 years; 42.5% women) underwent EMR (n = 63) or ESD (n = 44) of LNPCLs (median size, 40 mm; 74.8% right-sided colon) followed by defect closure. Complete closure was achieved in 96.3% (n = 103) with a mean of 1.4 ± .6 DAT clips and 2.9 ± 1.8 TTS clips. Delayed bleeding occurred in 1 patient (.9%) without requiring additional interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the DAT clip in conjunction with TTS clips achieved high complete defect closure after endoscopic resection of large LNPCLs and was associated with a .9% delayed bleeding rate. Future comparative trials and formal cost-analyses are needed to validate these findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05852457.).

Continuous suture technique increases the complete closure rate of colorectal mucosal defects after endoscopic resection: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Complete closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)/piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (p-EMR) procedures reduces postoperative adverse events, but the complete closure rate of the traditional method using only hemostatic clips is not satisfactory. Therefore, we invented a continuous suture technique using a barbed suture and clips to increase the complete closure rate of colorectal mucosal defects.

METHODS

Patients with a single large (≥ 2 cm) colorectal lesion were recruited. After completion of the ESD/p-EMR procedures, they were randomly allocated to the treatment group or control group. The mucosal defects of the treatment group were closed using barbed suture and clips, while the control group was closed using only clips.

RESULTS

From January 18, 2022 to April 13, 2022, a total of 62 patients with colorectal lesions were enrolled, with 31 patients in each group. Complete closure was achieved in 29 patients (93.5%) in the treatment group and 18 patients (58.1%) in the control group (P = 0.001). The median closure time was 13 min in the treatment group and 19 min in the control group (P < 0.001). The median closure speed was 6.4 cm2/10 min in the treatment group and 3.5 cm2/10 min in the control group (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a clinically feasible continuous suture technique that was safe and effective for the complete closure of colorectal mucosal defects after endoscopic resection.

Prophylactic clipping using the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system after complex ESD and EMR of large colon polyps

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding is the most frequent complication after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colon polyps. Today, prophylactic clipping with through-the-scope clips (TTSCs) is commonly used to reduce the risk of bleeding. However, the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system might be superior to TTSCs in achieving hemostasis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prophylactic clipping using the OTSC system after ESD or EMR of large colon polyps.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective collected database from 2009 until 2021 of three endoscopic centers. Patients with large (≥ 20 mm) colon polyps were enrolled. All polyps were removed by either ESD or EMR. After the resection, OTSCs were prophylactically applied on parts of the mucosal defect with a high risk of delayed bleeding or/and perforation. The main outcome measurement was delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 75 patients underwent ESD (67%, 50/75) or EMR (33%, 25/75) in the colorectum. The mean resected specimen diameter was 57 mm ± 24.1 (range 22-98 mm). The mean number of OTSCs placed on the mucosal defect was 2 (range 1-5). None of the mucosal defects were completely closed. Intraprocedural bleeding occurred in 5.3% (ESD 2.0% vs. EMR 12.0%; P = 0.105), and intraprocedural perforation occurred in 6.7% (ESD 8% vs. EMR 4%; P = 0.659) of the patients. Hemostasis was achieved in 100% of cases of intraprocedural bleeding, whereas two patients required surgical conversion due to intraprocedural perforation. Among the remaining 73 patients who received prosphylactic clipping, delayed bleeding occurred in 1.4% (ESD 0% vs. EMR 4.2%; P = 0.329), and delayed perforation occurred in 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prophylactic partial closure of large post-ESD/EMR mucosal defects using OTSCs could serve as an effective strategy to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation. The prophylactic partial closure of large complex post-ESD/EMR mucosal defects using OTSCs could serve as an effective strategy to reduce the risk of delayed bleeding and perforation.

Through-the-scope suture closure of nonampullary duodenal endoscopic mucosal resection defects: a retrospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding is among the most common adverse events associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of nonampullary duodenal polyps. We evaluated the rate of delayed bleeding and complete defect closure using a novel through-the-scope (TTS) suturing system for the closure of duodenal EMR defects.

METHODS

We reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent EMR for nonampullary duodenal polyps of ≥ 10 mm and prophylactic defect closure with TTS suturing between March 2021 and May 2022 at centers in the USA. We evaluated the rates of delayed bleeding and complete defect closure.

RESULTS

36 nonconsecutive patients (61 % women; mean [SD] age, 65 [12] years) underwent EMR of ≥ 10-mm duodenal polyps followed by attempted defect closure with TTS suturing. The mean (SD) lesion size was 29 (19) mm, defect size was 37 (25) mm; eight polyps (22 %) involved > 50 % of the lumen circumference. Complete closure was achieved in all cases (78 % with TTS suturing alone), using a median of one TTS suturing kit. There were no cases of delayed bleeding and no adverse events attributed to application of the TTS suturing device.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic closure of nonampullary duodenal EMR defects using TTS suturing resulted in a high rate of complete closure and no delayed bleeding events.

Novel through-the-scope suture closure of colonic EMR defects (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Large colon polyps removed by EMR can be complicated by delayed bleeding. Prophylactic defect clip closure can reduce post-EMR bleeding. Larger defects can be challenging to close using through-the-scope clips (TTSCs), and proximal defects are difficult to reach using over-the-scope techniques. A novel, through-the-scope suturing (TTSS) device allows direct closure of mucosal defects without scope withdrawal. The goal of this study was to evaluate the rate of delayed bleeding after the closure of large colon polyp EMR sites with TTSS.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed involving 13 centers. All defect closure by TTSS after EMR of colon polyps ≥2 cm from January 2021 to February 2022 were included. The primary outcome was rate of delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients (52% female; mean age, 65 years) underwent EMR of predominantly right-sided (n = 62 [66%]) colon polyps (median size, 35 mm; interquartile range, 30-40 mm) followed by defect closure with TTSS during the study period. All defects were successfully closed with TTSS alone (n = 62 [66%]) or with TTSS and TTSCs (n = 32 [34%]), using a median of 1 (interquartile range, 1-1) TTSS system. Delayed bleeding occurred in 3 patients (3.2%), with 2 requiring repeated endoscopic evaluation/treatment (moderate).

CONCLUSION

TTSS alone or with TTSCs was effective in achieving complete closure of all post-EMR defects, despite a large lesion size. After TTSS closure with or without adjunctive devices, delayed bleeding was seen in 3.2% of cases. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings before wider adoption of TTSS for large polypectomy closure.

Endoscopic Closure: Tools and Techniques

The rapid expansion of third space endoscopy has necessitated development of innovative endoscopic defect closure devices and techniques. This article discusses commonly used endoscopic closure devices and techniques, data on their safety and efficacy, and a description of the authors' own practice patterns.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Prophylactic Clipping to Prevent Delayed Bleeding and Perforation After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To help prevent delayed adverse events after endoscopic surgery, endoscopists often place clips at the site. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of prophylactic clipping in the prevention of delayed bleeding and perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched from the inception dates to April 2021. And we included all relevant studies. Pooled odds ratio comparing the prophylactic clipped group versus nonprophylactic clipped group were calculated using the random effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with a total size of 8693 participants. There was statistically significant difference in prophylactic clipping versus no prophylactic clipping for delayed bleeding and perforation found in all studies (odds ratio: 0.35, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.49, P <0.01; odds ratio: 0.42, 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.83, P <0.05; respectively). Besides, statistically significant difference was also found in subgroup analyses based on patients with lesions larger than 20 mm. Prophylactic clipping was more protective for duodenal delayed adverse events than colorectum. The use of clip closure was more protective to ESD-related delayed adverse events than EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping after ESD and EMR was beneficial in preventing delayed bleeding and perforation.

Risk Factors of Delayed Bleeding After Cold Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Delayed bleeding (DB) rarely occurs after cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal polyps, but no large-scale studies have investigated this. The present study evaluated the rate, characteristics, and risk factors of DB of CSP.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study at 10 Japanese institutions. A total of 18,007 patients underwent CSP for colorectal polyps ≤ 10 mm in size from March 2015 to September 2019, and cases of DB (DB group) were analyzed for the rate, antithrombotic drugs, polyp size, morphology, location, and risk factors. As a control, 269 non-bleeding cases (non-DB group) with 606 polyps who underwent CSP at the same 10 facilities in the 2-week study period were extracted.

RESULTS

We analyzed 26 DB cases with 28 lesions, and the total DB rate was 0.14% (26/18,007). The DB group had significantly higher rates of using antiplatelets (42.3% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.001) and anticoagulants (19.2% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.002), and significantly higher rates of polyp size ≥ 5 mm (67.9% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.015), rectal lesion (25.0% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.003), and polypoid lesion (89.3% vs. 55.3%, p < 0.001) than the non-DB group. A multivariate analysis (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval) for patient characteristics showed antiplatelet use (4.521; 1.817-11.249, p = 0.001) and anticoagulant use (7.866; 20.63-29.988, p = 0.003) as independent risk factors for DB. Polyp size ≥ 5 mm (3.251; 1.417-7.463, p = 0.005), rectal lesion (3.674; 1.426-9.465, p = 0.007), and polypoid lesion (7.087; 20.81-24.132, p = 0.002) were also risk factors for lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of DB was 0.14% and antithrombotic drug use, polyp size, location, and morphology were related to it.

Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions

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

A Comparison of Incomplete Resection Rate of Large and Small Colorectal Polyps by Cold Snare Polypectomy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are limited data regarding the safety and efficacy of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for large colorectal polyps. We evaluated factors affecting the clinical outcomes of CSP for polyps between 5 and 15 mm in size.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-center observational study involving 1000 patients undergoing colonoscopy. Polyps (5-15 mm) were removed using CSP, and biopsies were taken from the resection margin. The primary outcome was the incomplete resection rate (IRR), and was determined by the presence of residual neoplasia on biopsy. Correlations between IRR and polyp size, morphology, histology, and resection time were assessed by generalized estimating equation model.

RESULTS

A total of 440 neoplastic polyps were removed from 261 patients. The overall IRR was 2.27%, 1.98% for small (5-9 mm) vs 3.45% for large (10-15 mm) polyps (P = .411). In univariate analysis, the IRR was more likely to be related to sessile serrated lesions (odds ratio [OR], 6.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-25.45; P = .004), piecemeal resection (OR, 11.83; 95% CI, 1.20-116.49; P = .034), and prolonged resection time >60 seconds (OR, 7.56; 95% CI, 1.75-32.69; P = .007). In multivariable regression analysis, sessile serrated lesions (OR, 6.45; 95% CI, 1.48-28.03; P = .013) and resection time (OR, 7.39; 95% CI, 1.48-36.96; P = .015, respectively) were independent risk factors for IRR. Immediate bleeding was more frequent with resection of large polyps (6.90% vs 1.42%; P = .003). No recurrence was seen on follow-up colonoscopy in 37 cases with large polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

CSP is safe and effective for removal of colorectal polyps up to 15 mm in size, with a low IRR. (ClinicalTrials.gov; Number: NCT03647176).

Patient Selection, Risks, and Long-Term Outcomes Associated with Colorectal Polyp Resection

The 2 most significant complications of colonoscopy with polypectomy are bleeding and perforation. Although the incidence rates are generally low (<1%), these can be avoided by recognizing pertinent risk factors, which can be patient, polyp, and technique/device related. Endoscopists should be equipped to manage bleeding and perforation. Currently available devices and techniques to achieve hemostasis and manage colon perforations are reviewed.

Prophylactic clip closure for mucosal defects is associated with reduced adverse events after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a propensity-score matching analysis

Background

It is unclear whether prophylactic endoscopic closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) reduces the risk of postoperative adverse events due to variability in lesion characteristics. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study using propensity score matching to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clip closure in preventing postoperative adverse events after colorectal ESD.

Methods

This single-center retrospective cohort study included 219 colorectal neoplasms which were removed by ESD. The patients were allocated into the closure and non-closure groups, which were compared before and after propensity-score matching. Post-ESD adverse events including major and minor bleeding and delayed perforation were compared between the two groups.

Results

In this present study, 97 and 122 lesions were allocated to the closure and non-closure groups, respectively, and propensity score matching created 61 matched pairs. The rate of adverse events was significantly lower in the closure group than in the non-closure group (8% vs. 28%, P = 0.008). Delayed perforation occurred in two patients in the non-closure group, whereas no patient in the closure group developed delayed perforation. In contrast, there were no significant differences in other postoperative events including the rate of abdominal pain; fever, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein; and appetite loss between the two groups.

Conclusions

Propensity score matching analysis demonstrated that prophylactic closure was associated with a significantly reduced rate of adverse events after colorectal ESD. When technically feasible, mucosal defect closure after colorectal ESD may result in a favorable postoperative course.

Effect of prophylactic endoscopic clip placement on clinically significant post-endoscopic mucosal resection bleeding in the right colon: a single-centre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a cornerstone in the management of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. Clinically significant post-EMR bleeding occurs in 7% of cases and is most frequently encountered in the right colon. We aimed to assess the use of prophylactic clip closure in preventing clinically significant post-EMR bleeding within the right colon.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised controlled trial at a tertiary centre in Australia. Patients referred for the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps in the right colon were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into the clip or control (no clip) group, using a computerised random-number generator. The primary endpoint was clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, defined as haematochezia necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalisation, or re-intervention within 14 days post-EMR, which was analysed on the basis of intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02196649, and has been completed.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 4, 2016, and Dec 15, 2020, 231 patients were randomly assigned: 118 to the clip group and 113 to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, clinically significant post-EMR bleeding was less frequent in the clip group than in the control group (four [3·4%] of 118 patients vs 12 [10·6%] of 113; p=0·031; absolute risk reduction 7·2% [95% CI 0·7-13·8]; number needed to treat 13·9). There were no differences between groups in adverse events, including delayed perforation (one [<1%] in the clip group vs one [<1%] in the control group) and post-EMR pain (four [3%] vs six [5%]). No deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Prophylactic clip closure can be performed following the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps of 20 mm or larger in the right colon to reduce the risk of clinically significant post-EMR bleeding.

FUNDING

None.

The Role of Clips in Preventing Delayed Bleeding After Colorectal Polyp Resection: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonpedunculated colorectal polyps are normally endoscopically removed to prevent neoplastic progression. Delayed bleeding is the most common major adverse event. Clipping the resection defect has been suggested to reduce delayed bleedings. Our aim was to determine if prophylactic clipping reduces delayed bleedings and to analyze the contribution of polyp characteristics, extent of defect closure, and antithrombotic use.

METHODS

An individual patient data meta-analysis was performed. Studies on prophylactic clipping in nonpedunculated colorectal polyps were selected from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane database (last selection, April 2020). Authors were invited to share original study data. The primary outcome was delayed bleeding ≤30 days. Multivariable mixed models were used to determine the efficacy of prophylactic clipping in various subgroups adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Data of 5380 patients with 8948 resected polyps were included from 3 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective, and 8 retrospective studies. Prophylactic clipping reduced delayed bleeding in proximal polyps ≥20 mm (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.88; number needed to treat = 32), especially with antithrombotics (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.35-0.99; number needed to treat = 23; subgroup of anticoagulants/double platelet inhibitors: n = 226; OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.16-1.01; number needed to treat = 12). Prophylactic clipping did not benefit distal polyps ≥20 mm with antithrombotics (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.79-2.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping reduces delayed bleeding after resection of nonpedunculated, proximal colorectal polyps ≥20 mm, especially in patients using antithrombotics. No benefit was found for distal polyps. Based on this study, patients can be identified who may benefit from prophylactic clipping. (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020104317.).

Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends

Most colorectal cancers arise from adenomatous polyps and sessile serrated lesions. Screening colonoscopy and therapeutic polypectomy can potentially reduce colorectal cancer burden by early detection and removal of these polyps, thus decreasing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Most endoscopists are skilled in detecting and removing the vast majority of polyps endoscopically during a routine colonoscopy. Polyps can be considered “complex” based on size, location, morphology, underlying scar tissue, which are not amenable to removal by conventional endoscopic polypectomy techniques. They are technically more challenging to resect and carry an increased risk of complications. Most of these polyps were used to be managed by surgical intervention in the past. Rapid advancement in endoscopic resection techniques has led to a decreasing role of surgery in managing these complex polyps. These endoscopic resection techniques do require an expert in the field and advanced equipment to perform the procedure. In this review, we discuss various advanced endoscopic techniques for the management of complex polyps.

The application of endoscopic loop ligation in defect repair following endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer

OBJECTIVE

We sought to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel endoscopic closure technique in repairing gastric wall defects after endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria layer.

METHODS

From December 2016 to December 2019, patients with gastric submucosal tumors were enrolled and clinicopathological data were collected. All SMTs were resected by EFTR and gastric wall defects were closed using a novel endoscopic closure technique. The feasibility, efficacy, and safety were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients with gastric SMTs were included in this study. Among the included SMTs, 15 tumors were located in the fundus of the stomach, and 6 were located in the upper body of the stomach. The average size of the lesions was 2.3 cm (range: 1.9-2.5 cm). All patients underwent EFTR and the gastric wall defect was closed by endoscopic closure. The average endoscopic closure time was 9 min (range: 7-15 min) and the average hospitalization stay length was five days (range: 4-6 days). One patient developed abdominal pain on the first day after the procedure and their body temperature increased; he received treatments such as anti-infection, antacid, and gastrointestinal decompression and was cured and discharged after 4 days. No instance of delayed bleeding, postoperative gastrointestinal fistula, or abdominal infection occurred. No case was transferred to surgery. The postoperative pathology profile included 18 stromal tumors and 3 leiomyomas. During the follow-up period (6-24 months), no case of residual or recurrence was recorded.

CONCLUSION

The described endoscopic loop ligation technique is feasible, effective, and safe for repairing gastric wall defects after EFTR for gastric submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer.

Endoscopic hand suturing for mucosal defect closure after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection may reduce the risk of postoperative bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic hand suturing (EHS) is expected to decrease the risk of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) bleeding by closing mucosal defects. We investigated the efficacy of EHS after gastric ESD in patients with antithrombotic agents.

METHODS

In this prospective single-arm trial, patients taking antithrombotic agents for cardiovascular disease, arrhythmia, cerebrovascular disease and/or peripheral arterial disease and having <3-cm gastric neoplasms were recruited. The mucosal defects after ESD were closed by EHS in which the needle was delivered through an overtube, and the mucosal rim of the defect was continuously sutured in a linear fashion by manipulating the needle grasped with the needle holder, followed by cutting the remnant suture and retrieval of the needle. The primary endpoint was the incidence of postoperative bleeding within 4 weeks after ESD.

RESULTS

Twenty-two lesions in 20 patients (continuing antiplatelet agents in 11, anticoagulant agents in eight, both in one) underwent ESD followed by EHS. All defects (median size, 30 mm; range, 12-51 mm) were completely closed by EHS and remained closed on postoperative day 3. The median number of stitches was six (range, 4-8) and median suturing time was 36 (range, 24-60) min. There were no adverse events during/after EHS or postoperative bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative bleeding was not observed in patients taking antithrombotic agents without perioperative cessation. EHS appears to be useful for prevention of post-gastric ESD bleeding in high-risk patients. (Clinical registration number: UMIN000024184).

Endoscopic treatment of early colorectal cancer

Early colorectal neoplasia is a localized precancerous lesion of the large intestine associated with negligible risk of lymphatic or systemic dissemination. Early neoplasia consists of adenoma with low- and high-grade dysplasia, intramucosal carcinoma and superficially invasive cancer without other high-risk features. In the majority of cases, early neoplastic lesions are detected by colonoscopy and treated by means of endoscopy resection replacing surgical treatment. Risk of invasive cancer should be stratified during diagnostic colonoscopy using morphological classifications and then, appropriate resection technique (endoscopic polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection or full-thickness resection) is used. Success of endoscopic resection is assessed by histological examination of the resected specimen and in some cases, additional surgical resection with lymphadenectomy should be performed. Colonoscopic surveillance is needed due to the risk of local recurrence and metachronous lesions.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cold Snare Polypectomy Technique: Technique Matters More Than Snare Wire Diameter

INTRODUCTION

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is safe and effective for the removal of small adenomas (≤10 mm); however, reported incomplete resection rates (IRRs) vary. The optimal CSP technique, where a wide margin of normal tissue is resected around the target lesion, and snare design have both been hypothesized to reduce the IRR after CSP. We sought to investigate the efficacy of a thin-wire versus thick-wire diameter snare on IRR, using the standardized CSP technique.

METHODS

This was an international multicenter parallel design randomized trial with 17 endoscopists of varying experience (NCT02581254). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the use of a thin-wire (0.30 mm) or thick-wire (0.47 mm) snare for CSP of small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps. The primary end point was the IRR as determined by the histologic assessment of the defect margin after polypectomy.

RESULTS

Over 52 months to January 2020, 1,393 patients were eligible. A total of 660 patients with polyps (57.4% male) were randomized to a thin-wire (n = 339) or thick-wire (n = 321) snare. The overall IRR of the cohort was 1.5%. There was no significant difference in the IRR between the thin- and thick-wire arms; relative risk-0.41, 95% CI (0.11-1.56), P = 0.21. No significant differences were observed in the rate of adverse events.

DISCUSSION

In this multicenter randomized trial, CSP is safe and effective with very low rates of incomplete resection independent of the diameter of the snare wire used. This suggests that the optimal operator technique is more important than the snare design alone in minimizing residual adenoma after CSP.

Factors associated with complete clip closure after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM : Delayed bleeding is a common adverse event following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal polyps. Prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of nonpedunculated polyps larger than 20 mm reduces the incidence of severe delayed bleeding, especially in proximal polyps. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with complete prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of large polyps. METHODS : This is a post hoc analysis of the CLIP study (NCT01936948). All patients randomized to the clip group were included. Main outcome was complete clip closure of the mucosal resection defect. The defect was considered completely closed when no remaining mucosal defect was visible and clips were less than 1 cm apart. Factors associated with complete closure were evaluated in multivariable analysis. RESULTS : In total, 458 patients (age 65, 58 % men) with 494 large polyps were included. Complete clip closure of the resection defect was achieved for 338 polyps (68.4 %); closure was not complete for 156 (31.6 %). Factors associated with complete closure in adjusted analysis were smaller polyp size (odds ratio 1.06 for every millimeter decrease [95 % confidence interval 1.02-1.08]), good access (OR 3.58 [1.94-9.59]), complete submucosal lifting (OR 2.28 [1.36-3.90]), en bloc resection (OR 5.75 [1.48-22.39]), and serrated histology (OR 2.74 [1.35-5.56]). CONCLUSIONS : Complete clip closure was not achieved for almost one in three resected large nonpedunculated polyps. While stable access and en bloc resection facilitate clip closure, most factors associated with clip closure are not modifiable. This highlights the need for alternative closure options and measures to prevent bleeding.

Underwater vs Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Sessile or Flat Colorectal Polyps: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with submucosal injection is the current standard for the resection of large, nonmalignant colorectal polyps. We investigated whether underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is superior to CEMR for large (20-40mm) sessile or flat colorectal polyps.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients with sessile or flat colorectal polyps between 20 and 40 mm in size were randomly assigned to UEMR or CEMR. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included en bloc and R0 resection rates, number of resected pieces, procedure time, and adverse events.

RESULTS

En bloc resection rates were 33.3% in the UEMR group and 18.4% in the CEMR group (P = .045); R0 resection rates were 32.1% and 15.8% for UEMR vs CEMR, respectively (P = .025). UEMR was performed with significantly fewer pieces compared to CEMR (2 pieces: 45.5% UEMR vs 17.7% CEMR; P = .001). The overall recurrence rate did not differ between both groups (P = .253); however, subgroup analysis showed a significant difference in favor of UEMR for lesions of >30 mm to ≤40 mm in size (P = .031). The resection time was significantly shorter in the UEMR group (8 vs 14 minutes; P < .001). Adverse events did not differ between both groups (P = .611).

CONCLUSIONS

UEMR is superior to CEMR regarding en bloc resection, R0 resection, and procedure time for large colorectal lesions and shows significantly lower recurrence rates for lesions >30 mm to ≤40 mm in size. UEMR should be considered for the endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps.

Current Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Gastrointestinal Lesions: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Submucosal Dissection, and Full-Thickness Resection

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection of dysplastic lesions in early stages of cancer reduces mortality rates and is recommended by many national guidelines throughout the world. Snare polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are established techniques of polyp removal. The advantages of these methods are their relatively short procedure times and acceptable complication rates. The latter include delayed bleeding in 0.9% and a perforation risk of 0.4-1.3%, depending on the size and location of the resected lesion. EMR is a recent modification of endoscopic resection. A limited number of studies suggest that larger lesions can be removed en bloc with low complication rates and short procedure times. Novel techniques such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are used to enhance en bloc resection rates for larger, flat, or sessile lesions. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is employed for non-lifting lesions or those not easily amenable to resection. Procedures such as ESD or EFTR are emerging standards for lesions inaccessible to EMR techniques.

SUMMARY

Endoscopic treatment is now regarded as first-line therapy for benign lesions.

KEY MESSAGE

Endoscopic resection of dysplastic lesions or early stages of cancer is recommended. A plethora of different techniques can be used dependent on the lesions.

The efficacy of prophylactic clip closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection on delayed bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Although prophylactic clip closure after endoscopic mucosal resection may prevent delayed bleeding, information regarding colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (CR-ESD) is lacking. Therefore, this study evaluated the effect of prophylactic clip closure on delayed bleeding rate after CR-ESD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 614 CR-ESD procedures performed in 561 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome, which was delayed bleeding rate, was analyzed between the prophylactic clip closure and non-closure groups. Furthermore, the predictors of delayed bleeding were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients were divided into the clip closure group (n = 275) and non-closure group (n = 339). Delayed bleeding rate was significantly lower in the closure group than in non-closure group (6 cases [2.2%] vs. 20 cases [5.9%], p = .026). The univariate logistic regression analyses revealed that delayed bleeding was significantly associated with laterally spreading tumor-granular-nodular mixed type (LST-G-Mix; odds ratio [OR], 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70-8.34; p = .001). By contrast, prophylactic clip closure was significantly associated with low delayed bleeding rate (OR, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.14-0.90; p = .029). The multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed LST-G-Mix as a significant independent delayed bleeding predictor (OR, 3.25; 95%CI, 1.45-7.32; p = .004), whereas, prophylactic clip closure was identified as a significant independent preventive factor of delayed bleeding (OR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.15-1.00; p = .049).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clip closure after CR-ESD is associated with low delayed bleeding rate. LST-G-Mix promotes delayed bleeding, and performing prophylactic clip closure may be advisable.

Endoscopic characteristics influencing postpolypectomy bleeding in 1147 consecutive pedunculated colonic polyps: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postpolypectomy bleeding is the most common adverse event with pedunculated polyps. We clarified the endoscopic characteristics influencing postpolypectomy bleeding for pedunculated colonic polyps.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical data for 1147 pedunculated colonic polyps removed by polypectomy in 5 Japanese institutions. Pedunculated polyps were defined as polyps with a stalk length ≥5 mm. Analyzed clinical data were age, sex, polyp location/size, stalk length/width, prophylactic clipping or endoloop before polypectomy, injecting the stalk, closing the polypectomy site, antithrombotic agent use, and endoscopist experience. Postpolypectomy bleeding was classified as immediate bleeding or delayed bleeding.

RESULTS

Immediate and delayed bleeding was observed in 8.5% (97/1147) and 2% (23/1147) of polypectomies, respectively. Comparing immediate bleeding with nonbleeding, multivariate analysis showed that stalk width ≥6 mm (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.4) was a significant risk factor for immediate bleeding. For polyp size ≥15 mm, prophylactic endoloop use (OR, .17; 95% CI, .04-.72) was a significant inhibiting factor. Comparing delayed bleeding with nonbleeding, multivariate analysis showed that prophylactic clipping before polypectomy (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.3-13) and injecting the stalk (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-12) were significant risk factors for delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased risk for delayed bleeding with injecting the stalk and prophylactic clipping before polypectomy suggests that simple resection with coagulation mode is a suitable strategy in endoscopic resection of pedunculated polyps. Moreover, prophylactic endoloop use was highly likely to inhibit immediate bleeding with polyp size ≥15 mm.

Second-look endoscopy findings after endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal epithelial neoplasms

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although second-look endoscopy (SLE) is frequently performed after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to prevent bleeding, no studies have reported SLE findings after colorectal ESD. This study aimed to investigate SLE findings and their role in preventing delayed bleeding after colorectal ESD.

METHODS

Post-ESD ulcer appearances were divided into coagulation (with or without remnant minor vessels) and clip closure groups. SLE findings were categorized according to the Forrest classification (high-risk ulcer stigma [type I and IIa] and low-risk ulcer stigma [type IIb, IIc, III, or clip closure]), and risk factors for high-risk ulcer stigma were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 375 cases investigated, SLEs were performed in 171 (45.6%) patients. The incidences of high-risk ulcer stigma and low-risk stigma were 5.3% (9/171) and 94.7% (162/171), respectively. During SLE, endoscopic hemostasis was performed more frequently in the high-risk ulcer stigma group than in the lowrisk ulcer stigma group (44.4% [4/9] vs. 1.9% [3/162], respectively; p < 0.001), but most of the endoscopic hemostasis in the high-risk ulcer stigma group (3/4, 75.0%) were prophylactic hemostasis. Post-ESD delayed bleeding occurred in three (0.8%) patients belonging to the SLE group, of which, one patient was from the high-risk stigma group and two were from the low-risk stigma group.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of high-risk ulcer stigma during SLE was low, and delayed bleeding occurred in, both, high-risk and low-risk groups of SLE. SLEs performed after colorectal ESD may not be effective in preventing delayed bleeding, and further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of SLE in post-colorectal ESD.

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

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

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

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

Computerized image analysis of blood vessels within mucosal defects for the prediction of delayed bleeding following colonic endoscopic mucosal resection: a pilot study

BACKGROUND : Clinically significant post-endoscopic bleeding (CSPEB) is a common complication following colonic endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Current prediction tools are clinical and do not use the appearance of the post-EMR mucosal defect. We aimed to predict CSPEB by analyzing blood vessel morphology within the post-EMR mucosal defect. METHODS : 43 patients with CSPEB were matched to 43 non-bleeders for clinical variables associated with CSPEB. Computerized image analysis quantified the morphologic characteristics of the blood vessels in the defect. Variables were measured in relation to the mucosal defect area. Multivariate analysis and a neural network (NNET) were used as prediction models. RESULTS : The CSPEB group vessels had larger maximum diameter (113.07 vs. 69.03; P < 0.001), larger minimum radius (5.09 vs. 3.28; P = 0.002), larger perimeter value (337.82 vs. 193.86; P < 0.001), larger vessel length-of-outline (351.83 vs. 220.68; P = 0.002), and larger fractal dimension (1.11 vs. 1.10; P = 0.005) compared with non-bleeders. Discriminant analysis yielded 86 % sensitivity and 76.7 % specificity and an NNET classifier yielded 100 % sensitivity and 76.9 % specificity for identifying patients at risk. CONCLUSIONS : Blood vessel morphology in the post-EMR defect can be used to predict bleeding following colonic EMR.

Prophylactic clipping after endoscopic mucosal resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

It is not clear whether prophylactic clipping after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large nonpedunculated colorectal lesions (LNPCLs) prevents delayed bleeding (DB). We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to clarify the efficacy of prophylactic clipping in prevention of DB following EMR of LNPCLs.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies that compared clipping versus (vs) nonclipping in prevention of DB following EMR of LNPCLs. Pooled odds ratio (OR) was determined using a random effects model. The pooled ORs of DB, perforation, and post-polypectomy syndrome in the clipping group compared with the nonclipping group comprised the outcomes. Subgroup analyses based on study design, polyp location, and completeness of wound closure were performed.

RESULTS

Five studies with a total of 3112 LNPCLs were extracted. Prophylactic clipping reduced the risk of DB compared with nonclipping (3.3% vs 6.2%, OR: 0.494, P = 0.002) following EMR of LNPCLs. In subgroup analysis, prophylactic clipping reduced DB of LNPCLs at proximal location (3.8% vs 9.8%, P = 0.029), but not of them at distal location (P = 0.830). Complete wound closure showed superior efficacy to prevent DB compared with partial closure (2.0% vs 5.4%, P = 0.004). No benefit of clipping for preventing perforation or post-polypectomy syndrome was observed (P = 0.301 and 0.988, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping can reduce DB following EMR of LNPCLs at proximal location. Besides, complete wound closure showed superior efficacy to prevent DB compared with partial closure. Further cost analyses should be conducted to implement the most cost-effective strategies.

Prophylactic clips to reduce delayed polypectomy bleeding after resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prophylactic clips to prevent delayed polypectomy bleeding (DPB) after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps remains controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clips for preventing DPB by synthesizing the results of randomized trials.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to October 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of placing prophylactic clips to reduce DPB after resection of large (≥10 mm) colorectal polyps. The primary outcome was DPB defined by GI bleeding after the conclusion of the colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Eight studies (n = 3415) met the study criteria, all with a low risk of bias. The overall pooled incidence of DPB was 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4%-5.4%) in patients receiving endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. Placing prophylactic clips reduced DPB in patients receiving prophylactic clips (relative risk [RR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.85; I² = 37.8%) compared with no clips with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 52 (95% CI, 31-163). In stratified analyses, placing clips was associated with reduced risks of DPB in patients with polyps ≥20 mm (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.84; I² = 0.0%; NNT, 30), nonpedunculated morphology (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.81; I² = 0.0%; NNT, 39), and located proximal to the hepatic flexure (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.78; I² = 54.8%; NNT, 25) compared with no clips.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clips after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps ≥10 mm demonstrated a modest reduction in the risk of DPB. Larger reductions were observed in patients with polyps ≥20 mm, nonpedunculated morphology, or located proximal to the hepatic flexure.

Prophylactic clipping to prevent delayed colonic post-polypectomy bleeding: meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a commonly described adverse event following polypectomy. Prophylactic clipping may prevent DPPB in some patient subgroups. We performed a meta-analysis to assess both the efficacy and real-world effectiveness of prophylactic clipping.

METHODS

We performed a database search through March 2020 for clinical trials or observational studies assessing prophylactic clipping and DPPB. Pooled risk ratios (RR) were calculated using random effects models. Subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were performed to elucidate clinical or methodological factors associated with effects on outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2771 citations were screened, with 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 9 observational studies included, representing 24,670 colonoscopies. DPPB occurred in 2.0% of patients overall. The pooled RR of DPPB was 0.47 (95% CI 0.29-0.77) from RCTs enrolling only patients with polyps ≥ 20 mm. Remaining pooled RCT data did not demonstrate a benefit for clipping. The pooled RR of DPPB was 0.96 (95% CI 0.61-1.51) from observational studies including all polyp sizes. For patients with proximal polyps of any size, the RR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.33-1.62) from RCTs. Meta-regression confirmed that polyp size ≥ 20 mm significantly influenced the effect of clipping on DPPB.

CONCLUSION

Pooled evidence demonstrates a benefit when clipping polyps measuring ≥ 20 mm, especially in the proximal colon. In lower-risk subgroups, prophylactic clipping likely results in little to no difference in DPPB.

Endoscopic Suturing for the Prevention and Treatment of Complications Associated with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Duodenal Adenomas

Background/Aims

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the primary treatment for duodenal adenomas; however, it is associated with a high risk of perforation and bleeding, especially with larger lesions. The goal of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic suturing (ES) for the closure of mucosal defects after duodenal EMR.

Methods

Consecutive adult patients who underwent ES of large mucosal defects after EMR of large (>2 cm) duodenal adenomas were retrospectively enrolled. The OverStitch ES system was employed for closing mucosal defects after EMR. Clinical outcomes and complications, including delayed bleeding and perforation, were documented.

Results

During the study period, ES of mucosal defects was performed in seven patients in eight sessions (six for prophylaxis and two for the treatment of perforation). All ES sessions were technically successful. No early or delayed post-EMR bleeding was recorded. In addition, no clinically obvious duodenal stricture or recurrence was encountered on endoscopic follow-up evaluation, and no patients required subsequent surgical intervention.

Conclusions

ES for the prevention and treatment of duodenal perforation after EMR is technically feasible, safe, and effective. ES should be considered an option for preventing or treating perforations associated with EMR of large duodenal adenomas.