Risk factors for severe delayed postpolypectomy bleeding

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Cold Snare Polypectomy in Small (<10 mm) Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10 mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10 mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement.

RESULTS

Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5 mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.

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.

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.).

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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.

Clip closure to prevent adverse events after EMR of proximal large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

After EMR, prophylactic clipping is often performed to prevent clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) and other adverse events (AEs). Prior evidence syntheses have lacked sufficient power to assess clipping in relevant subgroups or in nonbleeding AEs. We performed a meta-analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from randomized trials assessing the efficacy of clipping to prevent AEs after EMR of proximal large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) ≥20 mm.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, and PubMed from inception to May 19, 2021. Two reviewers screened citations in duplicate. Corresponding authors of eligible studies were invited to contribute IPD. A random-effects 1-stage model was specified for estimating pooled effects, adjusting for patient sex and age and for lesion location and size, whereas a fixed-effects model was used for traditional meta-analyses.

RESULTS

From 3145 citations, 4 trials were included, representing 1248 patients with proximal LNPCPs. The overall rate of CSPEB was 3.5% and 9.0% in clipped and unclipped patients, respectively. IPD were available for 1150 patients, in which prophylactic clipping prevented CSPEB with an odds ratio (OR) of .31 (95% confidence interval [CI], .17-.54). Clipping was not associated with perforation or abdominal pain, with ORs of .78 (95% CI, .17-3.54) and .67 (95% CI, .20-2.22), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic clipping is efficacious in preventing CSPEB after EMR of proximal LNPCPs. Therefore, clip closure should be considered a standard component of EMR of LNPCPs in the proximal colon.

The risk of aspirin induced postoperative hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines recommend aspirin maintenance for high-risk endoscopic procedures. Some Asian physicians noticed increasing postoperative bleeding in patients taking aspirin. We aimed to explore whether risk of postoperative hemorrhage due to aspirin differs in the East and the West.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library database were systematically reviewed. We only included trials that met our criteria.

RESULTS

There is significant association between aspirin and postoperative bleeding (P < 0.001), especially in Eastern population (data from Japan, Korea, Turkey and China, P < 0.001). Result from the West (data from America, Canada and Australia) had no statistical significance (P = 0.07). For Easterners, aspirin increased bleeding risk after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). For Westerners, aspirin increased bleeding risk post endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). For patients undergoing ESD, those who continued to receive aspirin had higher bleeding risk than patients who interrupted it for more than 7 days (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Aspirin increases risk of postoperative hemorrhage. Easterners are more likely to suffer from bleeding after aspirin administration than Westerners. Stopping aspirin for more than 7 days may be advisable to control bleeding post ESD for patients with low risk of thrombosis.

From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s

Colonoscopy represents the most widespread and effective tool for the prevention and treatment of early stage preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in the panorama of cancer screening. In the world there are different approaches to the topic of colorectal cancer prevention and screening: different starting ages (45-50 years); different initial screening tools such as fecal occult blood with immunohistochemical or immune-enzymatic tests; recto-sigmoidoscopy; and colonoscopy. The key aspects of this scenario are composed of a proper bowel preparation that ensures a valid diagnostic examination, experienced endoscopist in detection of preneoplastic and early neoplastic lesions and open-minded to upcoming artificial intelligence-aided examination, knowledge in the field of resection of these lesions (from cold-snaring, through endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection, up to advanced tools), and management of complications.

Timing of Resumption of Anticoagulation After Polypectomy and Frequency of Post-procedural Complications: A Post-hoc Analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimal timing for anticoagulation resumption after polypectomy is unclear. We explored the association between timing of anticoagulation resumption and occurrence of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) and thromboembolic (TE) events.

METHODS

We performed a post-hoc analysis of patients in an earlier study whose anticoagulants were interrupted for polypectomy. We compared rates of clinically important delayed PPB and TE events in relationship to timing of anticoagulant resumption. Late resumption was defined as > 2 days after polypectomy.

RESULTS

Among 437 patients, 351 had early and 86 late resumption. Compared to early resumers, late resumers had greater polypectomy complexity. PPB rate was higher (but not significantly) in the late versus early resumers (2.3% vs. 0.9%, 1.47% greater, 95% CI [- 2.58 to 5.52], p = 0.26). TE events were more frequent in late versus early resumers [0% vs. 1.2% at 30 days, 0% vs. 2.3%, 95% CI 0.3-8, (p = 0.04) at 90 days]. On multivariate analysis, timing of restarting anticoagulation was not a significant predictor of PPB (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.61-1.44, p = 0.897). Significant predictors were number of polyps ≥ 1 cm (OR 4.14, 95% CI 1.27-13.66, p = 0.014) and use of fulguration (OR 11.43, 95% CI 1.35-80.80, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians delayed anticoagulation resumption more commonly after complex polypectomies. The timing of restarting anticoagulation was not a significant risk factor for PPB and late resumers had significantly higher rates of TE events within 90 days. Considering the potentially catastrophic consequences of TE events and the generally benign outcome of PPBs, clinicians should be cautious about delaying resumption of anticoagulation after polypectomy.

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.

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.

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.

Postprocedural Gastrointestinal Emergencies

Postprocedural complications encompass a wide array of conditions that vary in acuity, symptoms, index procedure, and treatment. Continued advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures have led to a significant shift of procedures to the ambulatory setting. This trend is of particular interest to the emergency physician, as patients who develop complications often present to an emergency department for evaluation and treatment. Here the authors examine a high-yield collection of procedures, both ambulatory and inpatient, notable for their frequent utilization and unique complication profiles including common laparoscopic surgical procedures, bariatric surgery, endoscopic procedures, interventional radiology procedures, and hernia repairs with implantable mesh.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Trial Registration

UMIN000040449.

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.

Child-Pugh B or C Cirrhosis Increases the Risk for Bleeding Following Colonoscopic Polypectomy

Background/Aims

The risk for colonoscopic postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) remains unclear. We determined the incidence and risk factors for colonoscopic PPB in patients with CLD, especially those with liver cirrhosis.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with CLD who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy at Seoul National University Hospital between 2011 and 2014. The study endpoints were immediate and delayed PPB.

Results

A total of 1,267 consecutive patients with CLD were included in the study. Immediate PPB occurred significantly more often in the Child-Pugh (CP) B or C cirrhosis group (17.5%) than in the CP-A (6.3%) and chronic hepatitis (4.6%) groups (p<0.001). Moreover, the incidence of delayed PPB in the CP-B or C cirrhosis group (4.4%) was significantly higher than that in the CP-A (0.7%) and chronic hepatitis (0.2%) groups (p<0.001). The independent risk factors for immediate PPB were CP-B or C cirrhosis (p=0.011), a platelet count <50,000/μL (p<0.001), 3 or more polyps (p=0.017), endoscopic mucosal resection or submucosal dissection (p<0.001), and polypectomy performed by trainees (p<0.001). The independent risk factors for delayed PPB were CP-B or C cirrhosis (p=0.009), and polyps >10 mm in size (p=0.010).

Conclusions

Patients with CP-B or C cirrhosis had an increased risk for bleeding following colonoscopic polypectomy.

Incidence and risk factors of colorectal delayed post-polypectomy bleeding in patients taking antithrombotics

OBJECTIVE

In this study we aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors for delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) in Chinese patients taking antithrombotics including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in patients who underwent colorectal polypectomy from January 2017 to May 2020. Their demographic characteristics, features of the polyps including number, size, morphology, and location, and use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants were collected. The incidence and risk factors for DPPB were compared between the patients with and without antithrombotic use.

RESULTS

A total of 5152 polyps from 2267 patients were resected under endoscopy. Of these patients, 35 (1.54%) experienced DPPB. Compared with the control group who did not take antithrombotics (1.18%), the incidence of DPPB was significantly higher in patients treated with heparin bridge (HB) therapy (17.39%; P < 0.001) and clopidogrel (4.88%; P = 0.022), but did not differ in patients taking aspirin (1.28%), dual antiplatelet therapy (3.70%), warfarin alone (0%), or direct oral anticoagulants (3.85%). Using the multivariate analysis, HB therapy (odds ratio [OR] 16.735, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.320-64.834, P < 0.001), male sex (OR 3.825, 95% CI 1.298-11.265, P = 0.015), polyps >1 cm (OR 4.584, 95% CI 1.782-11.794, P = 0.002) and rectal polyps (OR 8.820, 95% CI 3.968-19.602, P < 0.001) were independently associated with a high risk of DPPB.

CONCLUSIONS

HB and clopidogrel therapies significantly increase the incidence of DPPB. HB therapy, male sex, polyp size and polyps located in the rectum are significant risk factors for DPPB.

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.

Risk Factors Associated With Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There is limited data regarding the safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the cirrhotic population. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety of colonoscopic EMR in cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective review of cirrhotics who underwent colonic EMR at 8 Cleveland Clinic Centers between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2018. Patient data including polyp details and complications occurring within 30 days of the procedure were noted. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to find risk factors for post-EMR bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 238 patients who underwent EMR were included. There were 145 males (60.9%) and the mean age was 61.9±8.6 years. Immediate and delayed bleeding, and postpolypectomy syndrome rates were 9.2%, 5.8%, and 1.3%, respectively. Significant risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding were: increased age (P=0.001), procedure duration >37 minutes (P=0.001), antiplatelet use within 5 days (P=0.023), and lesion diameter >15 mm (P=0.004). Multivariable analysis revealed independent predictors of procedure-related bleeding: age above 65 years [odds ratio (OR) 2.14, P=0.044], antiplatelet use within 5 days (OR 2.42, P=0.047), right colon polyp (OR 3.51, P=0.001), and lesion diameter >15 mm (OR 3.22, P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR in cirrhotics has an acceptable bleeding risk. Age above 65 years, right colon polyp, polyp size >15 mm, and use of antiplatelets within 5 days are independent risk factors for bleeding.

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.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Prophylactic clipping not effective in preventing post-polypectomy bleeding for < 20-mm colon polyps: A multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Prophylactic clipping (PC) after polypectomy has the potential to prevent post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of PC in preventing PPB for < 20-mm polyps.

METHODS

This multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted from December 2013 to June 2017 at 10 institutions randomly assigned 1080 patients with < 20-mm colon polyps to the non-PC and PC groups. Allocation factors were institution, antiplatelet drug use, and polyp number. The primary endpoint was differences in PPB rates between the groups. The severity of PPB and post-procedural abdominal symptoms were also investigated. These endpoints in intention-to-treat and per-protocol (PP) analyses were evaluated.

RESULTS

We investigated 1039 patients with 2960 lesions. There was no significant difference between the groups in characteristics including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, antiplatelet drug use, and lesion characteristics such as type and size. Excluding the clip used in the non-PC group, intraoperative bleeding, and deviation of protocol, 903 patients were investigated in PP analysis. There was no significant difference in the PPB rate between the non-PC and PC groups (2.7% vs 2.3%, P = 0.6973 [intention-to-treat analysis]; 3.0 vs 2.4%, P = 0.7353 [PP analysis]). Severe PPB (≥ grade 3) was similar between the groups. Total procedure time was significantly shorter in the non-PC group than in the PC group (31 vs 36 min, P = 0.0002). Post-procedural abdominal fullness was less common in the non-PC group than in the PC group (20.8% vs 25.6%, P = 0.0833).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic clipping is not effective in preventing PBB for < 20-mm colon polyps (UMIN000012163).

A Novel Bipolar Polypectomy Snare Can Be an Alternative Choice for Endoscopic Resection

Objective: Endoscopic resection (ER) is more difficult and has a higher rate of complications, such as perforation and bleeding. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a bipolar polypectomy snare for ER.

Methods: Initial ER procedures in live pigs were carried out. Then, a human feasibility study was performed in patients with colorectal polyps. Finally, the finite element method was used to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the new bipolar snare.

Results: In the live animal model, there were no significant differences in wound size and cutting time between monopolar and bipolar groups. The histological results (histological scores) of the two groups in porcine experiments were almost the same except that the incision flatness of bipolar group was better than that of the monopolar group. Incidence of bleeding and perforation was similar between the two groups in pigs' and patients' study. At last, the finite element model showed that the vertical thermal damage depth produced by bipolar snare system was approximately 71–76% of that produced by monopolar snare system at the same power.

Conclusions: The novel bipolar snare is feasible in patients with colorectal polyps and can be an alternative choice for ERs.

Risk of colonoscopic post-polypectomy bleeding in patients after the discontinuation of antithrombotic therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Few studies have examined the incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) after discontinuation of antithrombotic therapies. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the incidence of PPB and thromboembolic events in patients whose antithrombotic agents were discontinued before colonoscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively selected all patients who underwent colon polypectomy at a community hospital. A total of 282 patients (540 polypectomies) discontinued antithrombotic agents (group 1), and 1,648 patients (2,827 polypectomies) did not take antithrombotic agents (group 2). The cessation periods before and after polypectomies were 4 and 3 days for warfarin, 5 and 3 days for anti-platelet agents, and 7 and 5 days of combination therapy, respectively. Main outcome measurements were the incidence of PPB and thromboembolic events.

RESULTS

Immediate PPB rates were 3.9% (11/282) in group 1 and 4.6% (76/1648) in group 2 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-1.72; p=0.65). Delayed PPB rates were 1.4% (4/282) in group 1 and 1.1% (18/1648) in group 2 (adjusted OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.36-4.24; p=0.732). No thromboembolic events were observed in either group.

CONCLUSION

Our cessation periods were appropriate, and further shortening of these periods is possible.

[Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Antithrombotic Agents in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are increasingly used in South Korea. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents and requiring gastrointestinal endoscopy is an important clinical challenge. Although clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents and undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy have been developed in the Unites States, Europe, and Asia Pacific region, it is uncertain whether these guidelines can be adopted in South Korea. After reviewing current CPGs, we identified unmet needs and recognized significant discrepancies in the clinical practice among regions. This is the first CPG in Korea providing information that may assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic or elective therapeutic endoscopy. This guideline was developed through the adaptation process as an evidence-based method, with four guidelines retrieved by systematic review. Eligible guidelines were evaluated according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II process, and 13 statements were established using a grading system. This guideline was reviewed by external experts before an official. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

The risk factors for delayed bleeding after endoscopic resection of colorectal tumors: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The most common complication of post-colorectal endoscopic resection is delayed bleeding. The assessment of risk factors for delayed bleeding provides important and useful information in standard clinical operations. The risk factors have been previously reported; however, they remain inconsistent across different studies.

AREAS COVERED

In this meta-analysis, the patient conditions, lesion-related factors, and operation-related factors were compared between delayed bleeding and no bleeding. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database were searched to identify eligible studies. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated along with heterogeneity.

EXPERT OPINION

This study is the first meta-analysis to investigate risk factors for colorectal delayed bleeding. We found several risk factors contributing to this condition: colorectal tumors located in the proximal colon, a history of antithrombotic drug use, high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia or early cancer, piecemeal resection, intraoperative hemorrhage, no clip placement, and severe submucosal fibrosis. Despite our findings, we also conclude that more high-quality, large-scale clinical randomized controlled studies are needed due to limited retrospective studies at present. Future therapeutic colonoscopies should focus on precise diagnosis, treatment safety, and management during the perioperative period.

Effects of antithrombotic agents on post-operative bleeding after endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal neoplasms and polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are some studies investigating the relationship between antithrombotic medication and postoperative bleeding after endoscopic resection (ER) with controversial results. 

AIM

To perform a meta-analysis evaluating the effects of antithrombotic therapy on postoperative bleeding after ER.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of studies. Stata 12.0 was used for statistical analysis. The odds ratio (OR) and 95%CI were calculated and heterogeneity was quantified using Cochran’s Q test and I².

RESULTS

Total 66 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled data suggested that antithrombotic therapy was significantly associated with postoperative bleeding (OR = 2.302, 95%CI: 2.057-2.577, P = 0.000) after ER. The risk of postoperative bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic mucosal resection and polypectomy in the antithrombotic group was higher than the non-antithrombotic group (OR = 2.439, 95%CI: 1.916-3.105; OR = 2.688, 95%CI: 1.098-6.582; OR = 2.112, 95%CI: 1.434-3.112). 

CONCLUSION

The risk of postoperative bleeding after ER correlated with the types and management of antithrombotic agents by our meta-analysis.

Incidence and risk factors of colonoscopic post-polypectomy bleeding and perforation in patients with end-stage renal disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Colonoscopic polypectomy in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are at risks of post-polypectomy bleeding and perforation, but evidences are limited. This study aimed to determine the incident polypectomy complications among ESRD patients.

METHODS

In the nationwide ESRD cohort, a propensity score matched case-control study design was conducted to assess risk associated with post-polypectomy bleeding and perforation using the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database from 1997 to 2013 for adults aged 40 years and older; 7011 ESRD and 19 118 non-ESRD patients met the study criteria. A total of 5302 patients in each group were matched for further analyses. The primary endpoint was post-polypectomy bleeding or bowel perforation in 30 days. The secondary endpoint was mortality and length of hospital stay for the bleeding complications requiring hospitalization.

RESULTS

Overall incidences of post-polypectomy bleeding or perforation in patients with ESRD was higher than the non-ESRD group (5.83% vs 1.78%, P < 0.0001) in the matched cohort. High risk of adverse outcomes was associated with ESRD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.85-3.05), female patient (aOR, 1.7, 95% CI, 1.37-2.11), history of acute myocardial infarction (aOR, 1.91, 95% CI, 1.1-3.32), liver disease (aOR, 1.79, 95% CI, 1.37-2.34), diabetes (aOR, 1.45, 95% CI, 1.16-1.82), cancer (aOR, 1.4, 95% CI, 1.09-1.81), inpatient setting (aOR, 13.19, 95% CI, 9.73-17.88), and prior use of clopidogrel (aOR, 1.61, 95% CI, 1.03-2.52) and warfarin (aOR, 2.03, 95% CI, 1.21-3.41).

CONCLUSIONS

End-stage renal disease was associated with approximately twofold higher risk of colonoscopic post-polypectomy bleeding or perforation and should be cautiously performed in this special population cohort.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Management of delayed bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps: a retrospective multi-center cohort study

Background and study aims  Delayed bleeding (DB) is the most frequent major adverse event after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Evidence-based guidelines for management of DB are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the clinical presentation, treatment and outcome of patients with DB and to determine factors associated with hemostatic therapy. Patients and methods  Patients with DB were identified by analyzing all consecutive EMR procedures for LNPCPs (≥ 2 cm) from one academic center (2012-2017) and seven regional hospitals (2015-2017). DB was defined as any postprocedural bleeding necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalization or reintervention. Outcome of DB was assessed for three clinical scenarios: continued bleeding (CB), spontaneous resolution without recurrent bleeding during 24 hours observation (SR), and recurrent bleeding (RB). Variables associated with hemostatic therapy were analyzed using logistic regression. Results  DB occurred after 42/542 (7.7 %) EMR procedures and re-colonoscopy was performed in 30 patients (72 %). Re-colonoscopy and hemostatic therapy rates were 92 % and 75 % for CB (n = 24), 25 % and 8 % for SR (n = 12), and 83 % and 67 % for RB (n = 6), respectively. Frequent hematochezia (≥ hourly) was the only factor significantly associated with hemostatic therapy (RR 2.23, p = 0.01). Re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostatic therapy occurred in 3/22 (13.6 %) patients. Conclusion  Ongoing or recurrent hematochezia is associated with a high rate of hemostatic therapy, warranting re-colonoscopy in these patients. A conservative approach is justified when bleeding spontaneously settles, and without recurrent hematochezia during 24 hours observation patients can be safely discharged without endoscopic re-examination.

Development of a definition and rules for causal attribution of post-colonoscopy bleeding

Background

Post-colonoscopy bleeding (PCB) is an important colonoscopy quality indicator that is recommended to be routinely collected by colorectal cancer screening programs and endoscopy quality improvement programs. We created a standardized and reliable definition of PCB and set of rules for attributing the relatedness of PCB to a colonoscopy.

Methods

PCB events were identified from colonoscopies performed at the Forzani & MacPhail Colon Cancer Screening Centre. Existing definitions and relatedness rules for PCB were reviewed by the authors and a draft definition and set of rules was created. The definition and rules were revised after initial testing was performed using a set of 15 bleeding events. Information available for each event included the original endoscopy report and data abstracted from the emergency or inpatient record by a trained research assistant. A validation set of 32 bleeding events were then reviewed to assess their interrater reliability by having three endoscopists and one research assistant complete independent reviews and three endoscopists complete a consensus review. The Kappa statistic was used to measure interrater reliability.

Results

The panel classified 28 of 32 events as meeting the definition of PCB and rated 7, 8 and 6 events as definitely, probably and possibly related to the colonoscopy, respectively. The Kappa for the definition of PCB for the three independent reviews was 0.82 (substantial agreement). The Kappa for the attribution of the PCB to the colonoscopy by the three endosocopists was 0.74 (substantial agreement). The research assistant had a high agreement with the panel for both the definition (100% agreement) and application of the causal criteria (kappa 0.95).

Conclusions

A standardized definition of PCB and attribution rules achieved high interrater reliability by endoscopists and a non-endoscopist and provides a template of required data for event adjudication by screening and quality improvement programs.

Management of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in endoscopy: A review of literature

Endoscopic procedures hold a basal risk of bleeding that depends on the type of procedure and patients’ comorbidities. Moreover, they are often performed in patients taking antiplatelet and anticoagulants agents, increasing the potential risk of intraprocedural and delayed bleeding. Even if the interruption of antithrombotic therapies is undoubtful effective in reducing the risk of bleeding, the thromboembolic risk that follows their suspension should not be underestimated. Therefore, it is fundamental for each endoscopist to be aware of the bleeding risk for every procedure, in order to measure the risk-benefit ratio for each patient. Moreover, knowledge of the proper management of antithrombotic agents before endoscopy, as well as the adequate timing for their resumption is essential.

This review aims to analyze current evidence from literature assessing, for each procedure, the basal risk of bleeding and the risk of bleeding in patients taking antithrombotic therapy, as well as to review the recommendation of American society for gastrointestinal endoscopy, European society of gastrointestinal endoscopy, British society of gastroenterology, Asian pacific association of gastroenterology and Asian pacific society for digestive endoscopy guidelines for the management of antithrombotic agents in urgent and elective endoscopic procedures.

Factors involved in endoscopists' choice for prophylactic clipping after colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection: a discrete choice experiment

Background: Delayed bleeding (DB) occurs in ∼10% after colorectal EMR. Prophylactic clipping (PC) was reported to significantly decrease DB-rate in proximal lesions ≥2 cm.Objective: Our aim was to determine which predefined variables contribute to using PC in clinical practice.Methods: We performed an international discrete choice experiment (DCE) among ∼500 endoscopists. Relevant variables for PC use were selected by EMR experts: previous DB, anticoagulants, polyp size, morphology, location, intraprocedural bleeding and visible vessel(s). Respondents answered case scenarios with various variable combinations, each time choosing only one scenario for PC, or the 'none' option. Part-worth utilities and importance weights were calculated using HB regression. Subsequently, a predictive model was created to calculate the likelihood of endoscopists choosing PC in any given case.Results: The survey was completed by 190 EMR endoscopists from 17 countries. In total, 8% would never use PC, whereas 30.9% never chose the 'none' option. All variables except polyp type were significant in decision-making for PC (p < .01). The most important factor was anticoagulant use, accounting for 22.5% in decision-making. Polyps <2 cm were considered eligible for PC by 14% in the presence of high-weighing factors such as anticoagulant use. No significant differences were found between high and low-to-moderately experienced endoscopists.Conclusions: PC after EMR is often considered useful by endoscopists, usually based on risk factors for DB. Anticoagulant use was the most important factor in decision-making for PC, independent of endoscopist experience. Although not considered cost-effective, one in seven endoscopists chose PC for adenomas <2 cm.

Prophylactic Endoscopic Clipping Does Not Prevent Delayed Postpolypectomy Bleeding in Routine Clinical Practice: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a relatively common adverse event. Evidence is conflicting on the efficacy of prophylactic clipping to prevent DPPB, and real-world effectiveness data are lacking. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing DPPB in a large screening-related cohort.

METHODS

We manually reviewed records of patients who underwent polypectomy from 2008 to 2014 at a screening facility. Endoscopist-, patient- and polyp-related data were collected. The primary outcome was DPPB within 30 days. All unplanned healthcare visits were reviewed; DPPB cases were adjudicated by committee using a criterion-based lexicon. Multivariable logistic regression was performed, yielding adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for the association between clipping and DPPB. Secondary analyses were performed on procedures where one polyp was removed, in addition to propensity score-matched and subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 8,366 colonoscopies involving polypectomy were analyzed, yielding 95 DPPB events. Prophylactic clipping was not associated with reduced DPPB (AOR 1.27; 0.83-1.96). These findings were similar in the single-polyp cohort (n = 3,369, AOR 1.07; 0.50-2.31). In patients with one proximal polyp ≥20 mm removed, there was a nonsignificant AOR with clipping of 0.55 (0.10-2.66). Clipping was not associated with a protective benefit in the propensity score-matched or other subgroup analyses.

DISCUSSION

In this large cohort study, prophylactic clipping was not associated with lower DPPB rates. Endoscopists should not routinely use prophylactic clipping in most patients. Additional effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies are required in patients with proximal lesions ≥20 mm, in whom there may be a role for prophylactic clipping.

Clinical validation of risk scoring systems to predict risk of delayed bleeding after EMR of large colorectal lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Endoscopic Resection Group of the Spanish Society of Endoscopy (GSEED-RE) model and the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACER) model were proposed to predict delayed bleeding (DB) after EMR of large superficial colorectal lesions, but neither has been validated. We validated and updated these models.

METHODS

A multicenter cohort study was performed in patients with nonpedunculated lesions ≥20 mm removed by EMR. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the GSEED-RE and ACER models. Difficulty performing EMR was subjectively categorized as low, medium, or high. We created a new model, including factors associated with DB in 3 cohort studies.

RESULTS

DB occurred in 45 of 1034 EMRs (4.5%); it was associated with proximal location (odds ratio [OR], 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-6.16), antiplatelet agents (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, .99-6.34) or anticoagulants (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 2.14-9.63), difficulty of EMR (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.41-7.40), and comorbidity (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, .99-4.47). The GSEED-RE and ACER models did not accurately predict DB. Re-estimation and recalibration yielded acceptable results (GSEED-RE area under the curve [AUC], .64 [95% CI, .54-.74]; ACER AUC, .65 [95% CI, .57-.73]). We used lesion size, proximal location, comorbidity, and antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy to generate a new model, the GSEED-RE2, which achieved higher AUC values (.69-.73; 95% CI, .59-.80) and exhibited lower susceptibility to changes among datasets.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated GSEED-RE and ACER models achieved acceptable prediction levels of DB. The GSEED-RE2 model may achieve better prediction results and could be used to guide the management of patients after validation by other external groups. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03050333.).

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

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