Clinical features of post-polypectomy bleeding associated with heparin bridge therapy

Safety of edoxaban for delayed bleeding in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures with a high risk of bleeding

Objectives

There are limited reports on the safety of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in individuals taking edoxaban, one of the direct oral anticoagulants. We clarified the incidence of delayed bleeding in patients who were on edoxaban in the perioperative period of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures with a high risk of bleeding.

Methods

This was an investigator-initiated, single-center, open-label, prospective, single-arm study. Patients on warfarin or edoxaban undergoing endoscopy with a high risk of bleeding were enrolled from June 2018 to September 2021. Warfarin was replaced with edoxaban in patients on warfarin. Patients taking other direct oral anticoagulants, and antiplatelet drugs, were excluded. The primary endpoint was severe delayed bleeding (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grades III-V) and the secondary endpoints included thromboembolism, all adverse events, any delayed bleeding (CTCAE grades I or II), and hospital stay durations.

Results

Twenty-one patients on edoxaban underwent high-risk endoscopy. Three cases (14%) experienced CTCAE grade III delayed bleeding, requiring endoscopic hemostasis. No CTCAE grade I-II delayed bleeding or thromboembolic events occurred. Cholangitis and aspiration pneumonia (conservatively treated) occurred during the hospital stay. The median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range 3-24 days). Patients with delayed bleeding had higher systolic blood pressure at admission and longer hospital stays.

Conclusions

The delayed bleeding incidence in high-risk endoscopic procedures for patients on edoxaban was acceptable. Higher blood pressure may be associated with increased risk, but further research is needed.

Prediction and prevention of post-procedural bleedings in patients with cirrhosis

Although post-procedural bleedings are infrequent in patients with cirrhosis, they are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Therefore, predicting and preventing such bleedings is important. Established predictors of post-procedural bleeding include high-bleeding risk procedure, severe cirrhosis and high body mass index; prognostic value of anemia, acute kidney injury and bacterial infection is more uncertain. While prothrombin time and international normalized ratio do not predict post-procedural bleeding, some evidence suggests that platelet count, whole blood thrombin generation assay and viscoelastic tests may be helpful in this context. Prevention of postprocedural bleeding involves careful management of antithrombotic drugs during the periprocedural period. Patients with cirrhosis present unique challenges due to altered pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antithrombotic drugs, but there is a lack of dedicated studies specifically focused on this patient population. Guidelines for periprocedural management of antithrombotic drugs developed for patients without liver disease are thus applied to those with cirrhosis. Some technical aspects may decrease the risk of post-procedural bleeding, namely ultrasoundguidance, opting for transjugular route rather than percutaneous route, and the level of expertise of the operator. The effectiveness of platelet transfusions or thrombopoietin-receptor agonists remains uncertain. Transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma, of fibrinogen, and administration of tranexamic acid are not recommended for reducing post-procedural bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. In conclusion, prediction of post-procedural requires a global approach taking into account the patients characteristics, the risk of the procedure, and the platelet count. There is little data to support prophylactic correction of hemostasis, and dedicated studies are needed.

Bleeding Risk During Colorectal Endoscopic Mucosal Resection With Continued Anticoagulant Therapy: A Multicenter Study

Background and aims Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a standard preventive method for colorectal cancer. Managing patients on anticoagulants during EMR is challenging because of balancing bleeding and thrombotic risks. Updated guidelines recommend continuing anticoagulants over heparin bridging; however, data on bleeding risks with continuing anticoagulants remain limited. This multicenter prospective study evaluated bleeding rates in patients who continued oral anticoagulants during EMR. Methods Patients on warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) undergoing EMR were enrolled from 12 tertiary hospitals. Warfarin was maintained on the day of EMR, while DOACs were paused on the day of EMR and resumed afterward. Post-EMR mucosal defects were closed with clips per protocol. Adverse events were monitored for 30 days. The primary endpoint was the major bleeding rate, defined as immediate bleeding requiring difficult hemostasis or delayed bleeding necessitating endoscopic intervention. The secondary endpoints were minor bleeding, other adverse events, and differences in bleeding rates between warfarin and DOACs. Results Among 107 patients (341 polyps; mean size = 6.7 mm), major bleeding occurred in five (4.7%) patients (95% confidence interval: 2.0%-10.5%), and all cases were managed endoscopically. Minor bleeding and thromboembolism events occurred in eight (7.5%) patients and one (0.9%) patient, respectively. No significant differences in bleeding rates were observed between warfarin and DOACs. Major bleeding rates were lower than those reported for heparin bridging. Conclusions Continuing anticoagulant therapy during EMR was associated with a low major bleeding rate (4.7%) and minimal thrombotic events, supporting its safety as an alternative to heparin bridging.

Curable giant hematoma due to small bowel mesenteric laceration after screening colonoscopy: a case report

Introduction and importance

Mesenteric laceration after screening colonoscopy is a rare and fatal complication. This case reported a giant hematoma due to a small intestinal mesenteric laceration after a screening colonoscopy.

Case description

A 56-year-old woman complained of persistent dramatic abdominal pain after the screening colonoscopy. This patient has appendectomy, rheumatic heart disease, IgG4-related disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and coronary atherosclerotic heart disease. Blood tests showed hemoglobin concentration sharply fell to 87 g/L and computed tomography scans confirmed a 16.4 cm × 6.1 cm × 9.5 cm hematoma abdominal hematoma near the small intestine. Digital subtraction angiography consistently showed rough and disordered the fourth group of the superior mesenteric artery. The main diagnosis was mesenteric laceration of the small intestine following colonoscopy. The patient was treated with fasting, gastrointestinal decompression, rehydration, inhibition of gastric acid, and meropenem to fight infection, 4 U suspended red blood cells and 400 mL fresh frozen plasma. Finally, this patient was discharged after conservative treatment, and the abdominal hematoma was significantly shrunk after 3 months.

Clinical discussion

Anticoagulants, a history of previous abdominal surgery, and IgG-RD leading to abdominal fibrosis were possible risk factors for mesenteric laceration. When the patient's condition is complex and has no absolute indication for surgery, conservative management could be appropriately considered.

Conclusions

We reported a case of abdominal hematoma due to colonoscopy. The successful conservative therapy may provide a novel experience for intra-abdominal hematoma treatment.

Adverse Events after Different Endoscopic Resection Procedures for Small and Intermediate-Sized Colorectal Polyps

INTRODUCTION

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) have been developed recently, in addition to conventional methods, but adverse events of each method have not been fully clarified. We compared the outcomes of each method for the appropriate choice.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CSP, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)/hot snare polypectomy (HSP), or UEMR for small and intermediate-sized colorectal polyps between April 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively examined. The rate of adverse events and recurrences due to each method were determined as the main outcomes. Clinical factors related to adverse events were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 1,025 patients with 3,163 polyps underwent polypectomy using any of the methods. CSP, EMR/HSP, and UEMR were performed for 704 (22.2%), 2,145 (67.8%), and 314 polyps (9.9%), and the median size for each method was 4, 6, and 7 mm, respectively. Delayed bleeding for CSP, EMR/HSP, and UEMR was 0%, 0.2%, and 0.6% (p = 0.15), and perforation was 0%, 0.1%, and 0%, respectively (p = 0.62). Recurrence after CSP, EMR/HSP, and UEMR was 0.3%, 0.09%, and 1.3%, respectively (p < 0.01). Recurrence for UEMR was significantly higher in the early stage of procedure introduction (p = 0.015). Oral anticoagulants were the risk factor for delayed bleeding (p < 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference regarding adverse events among each method for small and intermediate-sized polyps, although the recurrence rate after UEMR was higher than other methods.

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Risk of Delayed Bleeding after Cold Snare Polypectomy in Patients with Antithrombotic Therapy

BACKGROUND

Cold snare polypectomy is being increasingly adopted; however, there are few reports of cold snare polypectomy regarding antithrombotic therapy.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the real-world safety of cold snare polypectomy during antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS

We collected data from consecutive patients undergoing cold snare polypectomy in a single hospital between 2013 and 2017. Indications for cold snare polypectomy were any ≤ 10 mm polyp. The primary outcome was delayed bleeding. We compared rates of delayed bleeding between patients with and without antithrombotic therapy and analyzed risk factors for delayed bleeding using binary logistic regression model with firth procedure.

RESULTS

In 2152 patients (mean age 67.6 years; male 1411), 4433 colorectal polyps (mean diameter 5.0 mm) underwent cold snare polypectomy. Clipping during the procedure was performed for 5.8%. Delayed bleeding occurred in 0.51% (11/2152) of patients and 0.25% (11/4433) of polyps, but no major delayed bleeding occurred. A total of 244 (11%) patients received antithrombotic therapy. Patients on antithrombotic therapy were older (p < 0.001), more likely male (p < 0.001) and had cold snare polypectomy in the proximal colon (p = 0.011). The rate of delayed bleeding was higher in patients on antithrombotic therapy (1.64% vs. non-antithrombotic therapy 0.37%, p = 0.009). Larger polyp size (> 5 mm), use of clips, and antithrombotic therapy were significant risk factors for delayed bleeding. There was no clear association between specific antithrombotic agents and delayed bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed bleeding after cold snare polypectomy was rare even in patients with antithrombotic therapy, and no major delayed bleeding occurred.

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

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

Potential for replacing warfarin with a direct oral anticoagulant for endoscopic mucosal resection in the colorectum: A multicenter, open‐label, randomized controlled trial

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

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

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

Safety of cold snare polypectomy with periprocedural antithrombotic agents for colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal polyps in patients administered periprocedural antithrombotic agents.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through June 2021. The primary outcomes were the rates of delayed and immediate bleeding (requiring endoscopic hemostasis). Secondary outcomes included thromboembolic events. Meta-analysis using odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was performed to compare the outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies, including five randomized trials, were included. Over 96% of polyps were ⩽1 cm. The pooled rates of delayed and immediate bleeding for patients receiving CSP and periprocedural antithrombotic agents were 1.6% and 10.5%, respectively. Both the delayed (OR = 4.02, 95% CI = 1.98-8.17) and immediate bleeding (OR = 5.85, 95% CI = 3.84-8.89) rates were significantly higher in patients using periprocedural antithrombotic agents than in non-users. Although both antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants increased the risk of delayed bleeding, the risks associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; 2.5%) or multiple agents (3.9%) were particularly high. Compared to their counterparts, diminutive polyps and uncomplicated lesions not requiring hemoclipping were associated with lower risks of delayed bleeding (pooled estimates of 0.4% and 0.18%, respectively). Thromboembolic risk was similar among patients using and not using periprocedural antithrombotic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

CSP with periprocedural antiplatelet agents and warfarin may be feasible, especially for diminutive polyps. However, drug discontinuation should be considered with the use of DOACs or multiple agents which entail higher bleeding risk even with hemoclipping.

Evaluation of cold snare polypectomy for small pedunculated (Ip) polyps with thin stalks: a prospective clinical feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Although the use of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has spread rapidly, no prospective studies evaluating the safety of CSP for pedunculated (Ip) polyps have been carried out.

AIM

We performed this study to provide an accurate evaluation of the safety of CSP for Ip polyps.

METHODS

This is a prospective study (UMIN000035687). From January 2019 to February 2021, the safety of CSP for use on Ip polyps <10 mm with thin stalks was evaluated at our hospital. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of bleeding (delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) and immediate bleeding).

RESULTS

During the study period, 89 consecutive patients (including 92 colonoscopies and 114 polyps) were prospectively enrolled. The en-bloc resection rate was 100%. The rate of DPPB after CSP was 0%, however, DPPB after conversion to HSP occurred in 1 case (33.3% (1/3)). The rate of immediate bleeding during CSP was 28.9% (33/114). Polyps with diameters ≥6 mm (OR (95% CI): 2.77 (1.041-7.376); p = .041) were extracted as independent risk factors for immediate bleeding during CSP for Ip polyps. In all, 104 (91.2%) polyps were low-grade adenomas, and the percentage of cases with negative pathological margins was 96.5% (110/114).

CONCLUSIONS

CSP for Ip polyps was safe and had good outcomes. We believe that Ip polyps could be included as an indication for CSP, and that CSP may become the next step in the 'cold revolution.' To confirm our results and verify CSP's inclusion in future guidelines, prospective, randomized studies are necessary.

Risks of post-colonoscopic polypectomy bleeding and thromboembolism with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

There were limited data on the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). We aimed to evaluate the PPB and thromboembolic risks among DOAC and warfarin users in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

We performed a territory-wide retrospective cohort study involving patients in Hong Kong from 2012 to 2020. Patients who received an oral anticoagulant and had undergone colonoscopy with polypectomy were identified. Propensity-score models with inverse probability of treatment weighting were developed for the warfarin-DOAC and between-DOAC comparisons. The primary outcome was clinically significant delayed PPB, defined as repeat colonoscopy requiring haemostasis within 30 days. The secondary outcomes were 30-day blood transfusion requirement and new thromboembolic event.

RESULTS

Apixaban was associated with lower PPB risk than warfarin (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.63, p<0.001). Dabigatran (aHR 2.23, 95% CI 1.04 to 4.77, adjusted p (ap)=0.035) and rivaroxaban (aHR 2.72, 95% CI 1.35 to 5.48, ap=0.002) were associated with higher PPB risk than apixaban. In subgroup analysis, apixaban was associated with lower PPB risk in patients aged ≥70 years and patients with right-sided colonic polyps.For thromboembolic events, apixaban was associated with lower risk than warfarin (aHR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.45, p<0.001). Dabigatran (aHR 2.60, 95% CI 1.06 to 6.41, ap=0.033) and rivaroxaban (aHR 2.96, 95% CI 1.19 to 7.37, ap =0.013) were associated with higher thromboembolic risk than apixaban.

CONCLUSIONS

Apixaban was associated with a significantly lower risk of PPB and thromboembolism than warfarin, dabigatran and rivaroxaban, particularly in older patients with right-sided polyps.

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Continuous warfarin administration versus heparin bridging therapy in post colorectal polypectomy haemorrhage: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (WHICH study)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic removal of colorectal adenoma is considered an effective treatment for reducing the mortality rates associated with colorectal cancer. Warfarin, a type of anticoagulant, is widely used for the treatment and prevention of thromboembolism; however, bleeding may increase with its administration after polypectomy. In recent times, a high incidence of bleeding after endoscopic polypectomy has been reported in patients receiving heparin bridge therapy. However, previous studies have not compared the bleeding rate after endoscopic colorectal polypectomy between patients who continued with anticoagulant therapy and those who received heparin bridge therapy. We hypothesised that endoscopic colorectal polypectomy under the novel treatment with continuous warfarin is not inferior to endoscopic colorectal polypectomy under standard treatment with heparin bridge therapy with respect to the rate of postoperative bleeding. This study aims to compare the efficacy of endoscopic colorectal polypectomy with continuous warfarin administration and endoscopic colorectal polypectomy with heparin bridge therapy with respect to the rate of postoperative bleeding.

METHODS

We will conduct a prospective multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial of two parallel groups. We will compare patients scheduled to undergo colorectal polypectomy under anticoagulant therapy with warfarin. There will be 2 groups, namely, a standard treatment group (heparin bridge therapy) and the experimental treatment group (continued anticoagulant therapy). The primary outcome measure is the rate of postoperative bleeding. On the contrary, the secondary outcomes include the rate of cumulative bleeding, rate of overt haemorrhage (that does not qualify for the definition of haemorrhage after endoscopic polypectomy), incidence of haemorrhage requiring haemostasis during endoscopic polypectomy, intraoperative bleeding during endoscopic colorectal polypectomy requiring angiography, abdominal surgery and/or blood transfusion, total rate of bleeding, risk factors for postoperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, incidence of thromboembolism, prothrombin time-international ratio (PT-INR) 28 days after the surgery, and incidence of serious adverse events.

DISCUSSION

The results of this randomised controlled trial will provide valuable information for the standardisation of management of anticoagulants in patients scheduled to undergo colorectal polypectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR UMIN000023720 . Registered on 22 August 2016.

The risk of post-polypectomy bleeding among patients receiving antithrombotic agents: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

In July 2012, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society updated their guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. Colonoscopic polypectomy procedures are associated with a high risk of bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

The present study evaluated the safety of colonoscopic polypectomy procedures in terms of bleeding, among patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary-level public cardiovascular hospital in Istanbul, Turkey.

METHODS

Colonoscopic polypectomies carried out in a single endoscopy unit between July 2018 and July 2019 were evaluated prospectively. The patients' data, including age, gender, comorbidities, whether antithrombotic drug use was ceased or whether patients were switched to bridging therapy, polyp size, polyp type, polyp location, histopathology, resection methods (hot snare, cold snare or forceps) and complications relating to the procedures were recorded.

RESULTS

The study was completed with 94 patients who underwent a total of 167 polypectomy procedures. As per the advice of the physicians who prescribed antithrombotic medications, 108 polypectomy procedures were performed on 60 patients without discontinuing medication and 59 polypectomy procedures were performed on 34 patients after discontinuing medication. The age, gender distribution and rate of bleeding did not differ significantly between the patients whose medication was discontinued and those whose medication was continued (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study found that the colonoscopic polypectomy procedure without discontinuation of antithrombotic medication did not increase the risk of bleeding. This procedure can be safely performed by experienced endoscopists in patients with an international normalized ratio (INR) below 2.5.

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.

Effect of anticoagulants on the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Background and study aims  In patients receiving antithrombotic therapy, the risks of delayed bleeding after endoscopic procedures for gastrointestinal neoplasms become a major problem. Few reports have shown the effects of delayed bleeding in patients taking anticoagulants after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This study aimed to evaluate the delayed bleeding events after colorectal ESD in patients receiving anticoagulant therapy. Patients and methods  We retrospectively analyzed 87 patients taking anticoagulants who underwent colorectal ESD from April 2012 to December 2017 at 13 Japanese institutions participating in the Osaka Gut Forum. Among these patients, warfarin users were managed with heparin bridge therapy (HBT), continued use of warfarin, a temporary switch to direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC), or withdrawal of warfarin, and DOAC users were managed with DOAC discontinuation with or without HBT. We investigated the occurrence rate of delayed bleeding and compared the rates between warfarin and DOAC users. Results  The delayed bleeding rate was 17.2 % among all patients. The delayed bleeding rate was higher in DOAC users than in warfarin users (23.3 % vs. 11.4 %, P  = 0.14), although no statistically significant difference was observed. In DOAC users, the delayed bleeding rates for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban users appeared similar (30 %, 18.2 %, 22.2 %, and 25 %, respectively). The onset of delayed bleeding in both warfarin and DOAC users was late, averaging 6.9 and 9.4 days, respectively. Conclusions  Among patients taking anticoagulants, the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal ESD was relatively high and the onset of delayed bleeding was late.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided, Percutaneous, and Transjugular Liver Biopsy: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Aims

Percutaneous liver biopsy (PCLB) or transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) have traditionally been performed to obtain a sample of hepatic tissue; however, endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUSLB) has become an attractive alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB.

Methods

Search strategies were developed in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Major outcomes included the following: adequacy of biopsy specimens (i.e., complete portal triads [CPT], total specimen length [TSL] in mm, and length of longest piece [LLP]) in mm), and rate of adverse events. Only studies comparing all biopsy approaches (i.e., EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB) were included.

Results

Five studies (EUSLB [n=301]; PCLB [n=176]; and TJLB [n=179]) were included. Biopsy cumulative adequacy rates for EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB were 93.51%, 98.27%, and 97.61%, respectively. Based on the subgroup analysis limited to EUS biopsy needles in current clinical practice, there was no difference in biopsy adequacy or adverse events for EUSLB compared to PCLB and TJLB (all p>0.050). A comparison of EUSLB and PCLB revealed no difference between specimens regarding both CPT (p=0.079) and LLP (p=0.085); however, a longer TSL (p<0.001) was observed. Compared to TJLB, EUSLB showed no difference in LLP (p=0.351), fewer CPT (p=0.042), and longer TSL (p=0.005).

Conclusions

EUSLB appears to be a safe, minimally invasive procedure that is comparable to PCLB and TJLB regarding biopsy specimens obtained and rate of adverse events associated with each method.

The effect of prophylactic hemoclip placement and risk factors of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding in polyps sized 6 to 20 millimeters: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is a major complication of polypectomy. The effect of prophylactic hemoclipping on delayed PPB is uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic hemoclipping and identify the risk factors of delayed PPB.

METHODS

Patients with polyps sized 6 to 20 mm underwent snare polypectomy from 2015 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients with prophylactic hemoclipping for delayed PPB prevention were included in the clipping group, and those without prophylactic hemoclipping were included in the non-clipping group. The incidence of delayed PPB and time to bleeding were compared between the groups. Multivariate analysis was used to identify the risk factors of delayed PPB. Propensity score matching was used to minimize potential bias.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 612 patients with 806 polyps were in the clipping group, and 576 patients with 806 polyps were in the non-clipping group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of delayed PPB and days to bleeding between two groups (0.8% vs 1.3%, p = 0.4; 3.4 ± 1.94 days vs 4.13 ± 3.39 days, p = 0.94). In the multivariate analysis, the polyp size [Odds ratio (OR):1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.01-1.16, p = 0.03), multiple polypectomies (OR: 4.64, 95% CI:1.24-17.44, p = 0.02) and a history of anticoagulant use (OR:37.52, 95% CI:6.49-216.8, p < 0.001) were associated with delayed PPB.

CONCLUSIONS

In polyps sized 6 to 20 mm, prophylactic hemoclip placement did not decrease the risk of delayed PPB. Patients without risk factors including multiple polypectomies and anticoagulant use are no need to performing prophylactic hemoclipping.

Antiplatelets, anticoagulants, and colonoscopic polypectomy

The management of antiplatelet and anticoagulant (ie, antithrombotic) agents is challenging in the periendoscopic setting. In this state-of-the-art update, we review current best practice recommendations focusing on the risk of immediate and delayed postpolypectomy bleeding in the context of drug discontinuation (ie, temporary interruption) and drug continuation. The data regarding polypectomy technique (cold snare vs conventional thermal-based) and prophylactic placement of hemostatic clips are evaluated to assess whether these endoscopic techniques are beneficial in reducing postpolypectomy bleeding. Finally, clinical takeaways are provided to facilitate safer polypectomy among patients on antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents.

Heparin bridge is associated with more post-polypectomy bleeding and emergency department visits among anticoagulated patients

Background:

Among patients undergoing colonoscopy, anticoagulants are usually stopped and are sometimes substituted by a heparin bridge (hep-bridge). We aimed to assess adverse events associated with hep-bridge compared to temporary cessation of anticoagulants (no-bridge).

Methods:

This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study that included anticoagulated patients undergoing colonoscopy between 2013 and 2016 at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center. In the no-bridge cohort, warfarin was stopped for 5 days and novel anticoagulants for 2 days pre-procedure. In the hep-bridge cohort, anticoagulants were stopped and were substituted by subcutaneous enoxaparin. The primary outcome was post-polypectomy bleeding. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular events, all-cause adverse events and emergency department or unscheduled ambulatory office visits within 30 days. The predictive values of the HAS-BLED and CHADS₂ scores were evaluated.

Results:

A total of 662 patients were included, of whom 551 underwent polypectomy (mean age 68.6 years; 97.6% male). Four hundred seventy colonoscopies were performed with no-bridge and 192 with hep-bridge. Post-polypectomy bleeding occurred in 6.0% of procedures: 5.7% in the no-bridge cohort compared to 13.0% of hep-bridge procedures (P=0.0038). Cardiovascular or thrombotic events occurred after 2.6% of the no-bridge and 5.2% of the hep-bridge procedures (P=0.1176). Emergency department or unscheduled office visits within 30 days were reported after 18.7% of the no-bridge procedures and 29.7% of the hep-bridge procedures (P<0.0001). Neither CHADS₂ nor HASBLED scores predicted bleeding.

Conclusion:

The use of hep-bridge was associated with a greater incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding and more emergency department and unscheduled office visits compared with cessation of all anticoagulants.

Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection with submucosal injection of epinephrine versus hypertonic saline in patients taking antithrombotic agents: propensity-score-matching analysis

Background

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to remove colon polyps is increasingly common in patients taking antithrombotic agents. The safety of EMR with submucosal saline injection has not been clearly demonstrated in this population.

Aims

The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of submucosal injection of saline–epinephrine versus hypertonic saline in colorectal EMR of patients taking antithrombotic agents.

Methods

This study enrolled 204 patients taking antithrombotic agents among 995 consecutive patients who underwent colonic EMR from April 2012 to March 2018 at Ureshino Medical Center. Patients were divided into two groups according to the injected solution: saline–epinephrine or hypertonic (10%) saline (n = 102 in each group). Treatment outcomes and adverse events were evaluated in each group and risk factors for immediate and post-EMR bleeding were investigated.

Results

There were no differences between groups in patient or polyp characteristics. The main antithrombotic agents were low-dose aspirin, warfarin, and clopidogrel. Propensity-score matching created 80 matched pairs. Adjusted comparisons between groups showed similar en bloc resection rates (95.1% with saline–epinephrine vs. 98.0% with hypertonic saline). There were no significant differences in adverse events (immediate EMR bleeding, post-EMR bleeding, perforation, or mortality) between groups. Multivariate analyses revealed that polyp size over 10 mm was associated with an increased risk of immediate EMR bleeding (odds ratio 12.1, 95% confidence interval 2.0–74.0; P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Two tested solutions in colorectal EMR were considered to be both safe and effective in patients taking antithrombotic agents.

Post-polypectomy bleeding in hot-snare polypectomy of colonic polyps under continued warfarin or short interruption of direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Newly published guidelines of the Japanese Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) suggest to consider endoscopic procedures with high risk of bleeding without stopping warfarin and with stopping direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) only on the day of the procedure. In this study, we aimed to test the validity of these recommendations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 344 patients with anticoagulant therapy who underwent hot-snare polypectomy between January 2012 and October 2018. Patients (n = 132) with interruption of anticoagulants (3-7 days for warfarin and 2-3 days for DOACs before the procedure) and without heparin-bridging were excluded. Among the remaining 212 patients, the incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding was compared between the following 2 patient groups: patients who had interruption of anticoagulants with heparin-bridging (HB group, n = 139) and patients treated according to the new JGES guideline (FG group, n = 73).

RESULTS

The rate of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in FG group (9.6%) was not significantly different from that in HB group (12.9%, p = 0.5). In subgroup analysis, the incidence of bleeding in patients with warfarin (12.2%) and with DOAC (6.3%) in FG group was not significantly different from corresponding figures in HB group (14.2%, 0%). In multivariate analysis, number of resected polyps was associated with PPB, but the administration of anticoagulants according to the new guidelines was not a significant risk factor for PPB (p = .98).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study affirms the recommendations of JGES for the management of anticoagulants in patients who undergo colonic polypectomy regarding post-polypectomy bleeding.

Heparin-bridging therapy is associated with post-colorectal polypectomy bleeding in patients whose oral anticoagulation therapy is interrupted

OBJECTIVES

The American and Japanese Societies for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines recommend heparin-bridging therapy for patients whose oral anticoagulants are interrupted for endoscopic procedures. However, little is known about the potential association between heparin-bridging therapy and post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB). The aim was to investigate the incidence of PPB associated with heparin-bridging therapy administered to patients whose anticoagulants were interrupted.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study using inverse propensity analysis. Between 2013 and 2015, 1004 patients with 2863 lesions were included. The primary outcomes were the rates of PPB and thromboembolism associated with heparin-bridging therapy. The risk factors associated with PPB were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis involving probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

RESULTS

The patients were categorized into a heparin-bridging therapy group (78 patients with 255 lesions) or a control group (926 patients with 2608 lesions). The PPB rate in the heparin-bridging therapy group (10.2%, 8/78) was significantly higher than in the control group (1.1%, 11/926) (p <.01). Thromboembolism occurred in one patient in the control group. The multivariate analysis revealed that heparin-bridging therapy was an independent risk factor associated with PPB (odds ratio [OR], 8.21; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.32-29.10; p <.01). IPTW showed heparin-bridging therapy increased PPB (OR, 7.68; 95% CI, 1.83-32.28; p <.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Heparin-bridging therapy administered to patients whose oral anticoagulants were interrupted was associated with an increased PPB risk.

A prospective multicenter observational study evaluating the risk of periendoscopic events in patients using anticoagulants: the Osaka GIANT Study

Background and study aims  An increasing number of patients have been using anticoagulants including anti-vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs); however, in patients using anticoagulants, limited data are available with regard to the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding and thromboembolic events during the peri-endoscopic period. We aimed to evaluate the peri-endoscopic bleeding and thrombotic risks in patients administered VKAs or DOACs. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients using anticoagulants who underwent endoscopic biopsy, mucosal resection, or submucosal dissection were prospectively enrolled across 11 hospitals. The primary outcome assessed was difference in incidence of post-procedural gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using VKAs and DOACs. Duration of hospitalization and peri-procedural thromboembolic events were also compared. Results  We enrolled 174 patients using VKAs and 37 using DOACs. In total, 16 patients using VKA were excluded from the analysis because of cancellation of endoscopic procedures and contraindications to the use of DOACs; 128 (81 %) patients using VKAs and 17 (46 %) using DOACs received heparin-bridging therapy (HB). The rate of post-procedural gastrointestinal bleeding in DOAC users was similar to that in VKA users (16.2 % vs. 16.4 %, P  = 1.000). Duration of hospitalization was significantly longer in patients using VKAs than in those using DOACs (median 15 vs. 7 days, P  < 0.0001). Myocardial infarction occurred during pre-endoscopic HB in one patient using VKAs. Conclusion  DOAC administration showed similar post-procedural gastrointestinal bleeding risk to VKA administration in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures, but it shortened the hospital stay.

Colonoscopy, Polypectomy, and the Risk of Bleeding

Colonoscopy with polypectomy is the means by which the incidence of colon cancer may be reduced; however, polypectomy is not without risk. Physicians must carefully weigh the risks and benefits of colonoscopy, particularly when patients are given prescriptions for antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. This article discusses the risks of colonoscopy and polypectomy and reviews the most recent data for managing antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants in the periendoscopic period.

Therapeutic endoscopy-related GI bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients using warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants: results from a large nationwide database analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risks of postendoscopy outcomes associated with warfarin with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), taking into account heparin bridging and various types of endoscopic procedures.

DESIGN

Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, we identified 16 977 patients who underwent 13 types of high-risk endoscopic procedures and took preoperative warfarin or DOACs from 2014 to 2015. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare postendoscopy GI bleeding and thromboembolism between the warfarin and DOAC groups.

RESULTS

In the propensity score-matched analysis involving 5046 pairs, the warfarin group had a significantly higher proportion of GI bleeding than the DOAC group (12.0% vs 9.9%; p=0.002). No significant difference was observed in thromboembolism (5.4% vs 4.7%) or in-hospital mortality (5.4% vs 4.7%). The risks of GI bleeding and thromboembolism were greater in patients treated with warfarin plus heparin bridging or DOACs plus bridging than in patients treated with DOACs alone. Compared with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic mucosal resection and haemostatic procedures including endoscopic variceal ligation or endoscopic injection sclerotherapy were at the highest risk of GI bleeding among the 13 types of endoscopic procedures, whereas those who underwent lower polypectomy endoscopic sphincterotomy or endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration were at moderate risk.

CONCLUSION

The risk of postendoscopy GI bleeding was higher in warfarin than DOAC users. Heparin bridging was associated with an increased risk of bleeding and did not prevent thromboembolism. The bleeding risk varied by the type of endoscopic procedure.

Safety of Cold Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps in Patients on Antithrombotic Medication

BACKGROUND

The cold polypectomy (CP) technique has been increasingly used in recent years. However, there have been few studies about post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients who underwent CP and who were on antithrombotic drugs. The objective of this study was to determine the safety of CP in patients on antithrombotic medication.

METHODS

The subjects were patients who underwent CP in our hospital between April 2014 and March 2016. PPB rates were examined in relation to the use of antithrombotic medication.

RESULTS

CP was performed to remove 2,466 polyps in 1,003 patients. There were 549 polyps (22.3%) in186 patients in the antithrombotic group and 1,917 polyps (77.7%) in 817 patients in the non-antithrombotic group. PPB occurred in 0.55% (3/549) of patients in the antithrombotic group and in 0.10% (2/1,917) of patients in the non-antithrombotic group, showing no significant difference (p = 0.07). Patients in the antithrombotic group in whom PPB occurred included 1 aspirin user with 1 polyp and 1 aspirin plus clopidogrel user with 2 polyps. No PPB occurred in patients on other antithrombotic agents or receiving heparin bridging. There was no significant difference between PPB rates in patients with small polyps (6-9 mm) in the antithrombotic and non-antithrombotic groups, but there was a significant difference between PPB rates in the 2 groups for patients with diminutive group (1-5 mm).

CONCLUSION

CP is a safe procedure even in patients on antithrombotic medication.

Use of anticoagulants increases risk of bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Japanese guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy have recommended temporary withdrawal of anticoagulants (warfarin, direct oral anticoagulants [DOAC], or heparin) to prevent hemorrhagic complications during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasias (CRNs). However, serious thrombosis might occur during temporary withdrawal of anticoagulants. The current study aimed to evaluate outcomes with anticoagulants in patients undergoing ESD for CRNs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 This study was a single-institution retrospective cohort study based on clinical records. We assessed 650 consecutive patients with 698 CRNs who underwent ESD at Hiroshima University Hospital between December 2010 and June 2016. The patients were divided into three groups: the warfarin group (19 patients with 19 CRNs), DOAC group (7 patients with 9 CRNs), and no-antithrombotics group (624 patients with 670 CRNs). We replaced warfarin with heparin 3 to 5 days before endoscopy. Although DOAC was suspended on the morning of endoscopy, we did not replace heparin.

RESULTS

 Bleeding after the procedure occurred in 26.3 % (5/19), 22.0 % (2/9), and 2.7 % (18/670) of patients in the warfarin, DOAC, and no-antithrombotics groups, respectively. In the warfarin group, four patients who bled after the procedure took not only warfarin but also other antiplatelets. En bloc resection rates were 94.7 % (18/19), 100 % (9/9), and 96.6 % (647/670) in the warfarin, DOAC, and no-antithrombotics groups, respectively. No patients experienced ischemic events in the perioperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing ESD for CRNs, risk of bleeding was higher among patients who took anticoagulants than among those who did not. In particular, careful attention to patients who took antiplatelets in addition to warfarin before ESD for CRNs is warranted.

Risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding in patients receiving anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Balancing the risks for thromboembolism and postpolypectomy bleeding in patients requiring anticoagulation and antiplatelet agents is challenging. We investigated the incidence and risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding on anticoagulation, including heparin bridge and other antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort and case control study at 2 tertiary-care medical centers from 2004 to 2012. Cases included male patients on antithrombotics with hematochezia after polypectomy. Nonbleeding controls were matched to cases 3 to 1 by antithrombotic type, study site, polypectomy technique, and year of procedure. Our outcomes were the incidence and risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding.

RESULTS

There were 59 cases and 174 matched controls. Postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 14.9% on bridge anticoagulation. This was significantly higher than the overall incidence of bleeding on antithrombotics at 1.19% (95% confidence interval, 0.91%-1.54%) (59/4923). We identified similarly low rates of bleeding in patients taking warfarin (0.66%), clopidogrel (0.84%), and aspirin (0.92%). Patients who bled tended to have larger polyps (13.9 vs 7.3 mm; P < .001) and more polyps ≥2 cm (41% vs 10%; P < .001). Bleeding risk was increased with restarting antithrombotics within 1 week postpolypectomy (odds ratio [OR] 4.50; P < .001), having polyps ≥2 cm (OR 5.94; P < .001), performing right-sided cautery (OR 2.61; P = .004), and having multiple large polyps (OR 2.92; P = .001). Among patients on warfarin, the presence of bridge anticoagulation was an independent risk factor for postpolypectomy bleeding (OR 12.27; P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that bridge anticoagulation is associated with a high incidence of postpolypectomy bleeding and is an independent risk factor for hemorrhage compared with patients taking warfarin alone. A higher threshold to use bridge anticoagulation should be considered in patients with an elevated bleeding risk.

Heparin-bridging therapy and risk of post-polypectomy bleeding: Meta-analysis of data reported by Japanese colonoscopists

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Peri-procedural bridging (PPB) with heparin is recommended for patients with high thromboembolic risk who need to withhold antithrombotic therapy for colonoscopic polypectomy. However, little is known about the bleeding risk from heparin-bridging therapy itself.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through January 2017 for studies that compared the risk of PPB in patients who received heparin-bridging therapy in lieu of antithrombotic agents for colonoscopic polypectomy and those who discontinued antithrombotic agents without receiving heparin. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model, generic inverse variance method. Between-study heterogeneity was quantified using the Q statistic and I² .

RESULTS

A total of five studies consisting of 2601 patients were identified. A significantly increased risk of PPB among bridged patients compared to non-bridged patients was demonstrated with a pooled OR of 8.29 (95% CI, 4.96-13.87). Statistical heterogeneity was low with I² of 0%.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated a significantly increased risk of PPB among patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy and received heparin-bridging therapy in lieu of antithrombotic agents compared to patients who did not receive it.

Replacement of warfarin with a novel oral anticoagulant in endoscopic mucosal resection: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Introduction

This randomised controlled trial aims to compare the efficacy of warfarin replacement with apixaban without postoperative resumption of heparin with that of conventional heparin bridging in patients taking warfarin and scheduled to undergo endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): specifically, by checking for reduction in proportion of postoperative bleeding following EMR.

Methods and analysis

The multicentre, open-label randomised parallel-group, controlled intervention study regards patients taking warfarin who are scheduled to undergo colon EMR. Enrolled patients have been taking oral warfarin for non-valvular atrial fibrillation or venous thrombosis on an outpatient basis, and have been found to have a colorectal polyp (including adenoma or early-stage cancer) for which EMR was indicated. They are assigned to one of two groups.

The primary endpoint is proportion of postoperative bleeding. The secondary endpoints are hospital stay length, therapeutic endoscopy outcomes such as proportion of en bloc resection, proportion of perforation, proportion of intraoperative bleeding, incidence of cerebral infarction/systemic embolism events, incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events, and proportion of postoperative therapeutic endoscopy.

Ethics and dissemination

This trial was approved by the National Hospital Organization Central Review Board for Clinical Trials (19 April 2016).

Discussion

The paucity of reports with high evidence levels was considered problematic when the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society’s gastroenterological endoscopy guidelines were revised in 2012. The results of this trial will have high medical significance, as its data could serve as the basis for revisions in the next edition of the guidelines.

Trial registration number

This trial was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) accepted from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). UMIN000021947; Pre-results.

Management of Anticoagulants and Antiplatelet Agents During Colonoscopy

Colonoscopy frequently is performed for patients who are taking aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet agents, and other anticoagulants. These colonoscopies often involve polypectomy, which can be complicated by bleeding. The risks of precipitating thromboembolic complications if anticoagulants are stopped must be weighed against the risk of postpolypectomy bleeding if these agents are continued. This article systematically reviews the management of anticoagulation during elective and emergency colonoscopy. For patients undergoing colonoscopic polypectomy, the overall risk of postpolypectomy bleeding is <0.5%. Risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding include large polyp size and anticoagulant use, especially warfarin and thienopyridines. For patients who do not stop aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs prior to colonoscopy, the rate of postpolypectomy bleeding is not significantly different from that for patients who do not take those medications. For patients who continue thienopyridines and undergo polypectomy, the risk of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding is approximately 2.4%. Even for patients who interrupt warfarin, the risk of postpolypectomy bleeding is increased. The direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors) have a rapid onset and offset of action, and periprocedural bridging generally is not necessary. For the thienopyridines, warfarin, and the direct oral anticoagulants, the decision to interrupt or continue these agents for endoscopy will involve considerable exercise of clinical judgment.

Colonic Postpolypectomy Bleeding Is Related to Polyp Size and Heparin Use

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We studied factors influencing colon postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB), with a focus on antithrombotic and anticoagulation therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective case-control study of all patients who underwent polypectomy at our tertiary referral center in Italy between 2007 and 2014. Polyp characteristics (number of polyps removed per patient, size, morphology, location, resection technique, prophylactic hemostasis methods) and patient characteristics (age, sex, comorbidities, medication) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The case and control groups included 118 and 539 patients, respectively. The two groups differed in the frequency of comorbidities (69% vs. 40%, p=0.001), polyps removed (27% vs. 18%, p=0.02), and use of heparin therapy (23% vs. 1%, p<0.001). A total of 279 polyps in the case group and 966 in the control group were nonpedunculated (69% vs. 81%, p=0.01) and measured ≥10 mm (78% vs. 32%, p=0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that polyps ≥10 mm (odds ratio [OR], 6.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-15.5), administration of heparin (OR, 16.5; 95% CI, 6.2-44), comorbidity (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.9), and presence of ≥2 risk factors (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7-6.0) were associated with PPB.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of PPB increases with polyp size ≥10 mm, heparin use, comorbidity, and presence of ≥2 risk factors.

Continuation of antithrombotic therapy may be associated with a high incidence of colonic post-polypectomy bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) is the most common complication of endoscopic procedures. To reduce the risk of thromboembolic incidents, Japanese guidelines for gastroenterological endoscopy were revised to indicate that antithrombotic agents were not to be discontinued for endoscopic treatment. However, carrying out endoscopic procedures under antithrombotic medication potentially increases the incidence of hemorrhagic complications. The present study investigated the impact of the revised guidelines on the frequency of complications after colonoscopic procedures.

METHODS

The surveillance period comprised the year before the initiation of the new guidelines (2012), which served as a control period, and 2 years after initiation of the new guidelines (2013 and 2014). During the control period, 3955 cases were examined colonoscopically and 1601 lesions were treated endoscopically. During the 2-year period under the new guidelines, 8749 colonoscopies and 3768 endoscopic treatments were carried out. Changes in treatment methods and rates of complications were compared.

RESULTS

PPB rate was not significantly different before and after the revision (0.87% vs 1.01%). With the new guidelines, PPB rates in antithrombotic non-users and users were 0.60% and 3.13%, respectively (OR 5.11, P = 0.000). Multivariable analysis showed that the risks for PPB were as follows: heparin bridging therapy (OR 6.34, P = 0.0002); low-dose aspirin (LDA) continuation (OR 5.30, P = 0.0079); and lesion size (OR 1.06, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that the overall PPB rate under the new guidelines was not significantly higher when compared with the previous data obtained before the new guidelines were introduced.

Heparin-bridging therapy is associated with a high risk of post-polypectomy bleeding regardless of polyp size

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Evidence regarding safety and efficacy of heparin-bridging therapy for colonoscopic polypectomy remains scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) in patients receiving heparin-bridging therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the database of patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy with prophylactic clip closure between January 2007 and December 2014 at our institution. We evaluated patients receiving heparin-bridging therapy (HB group) compared with those who did not receive antithrombotic therapy (No-HB group).

RESULTS

A total of 1421 polypectomies were carried out on 773 patients; 45 patients were in the HB group and 728 patients were in the No-HB group. The incidence of PPB per patient was significantly higher in the HB group (22.2% vs 1.9%, P < 0.0001), and multivariate analysis showed that heparin-bridging therapy was an independent risk factor for PPB (OR 9.80, 95% CI 4.23-22.3, P < 0.0001). In the HB group, the polyp size was not a risk factor for PPB (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.19-2.26, P = 0.55); the incidence of PPB in lesions of <10 mm and ≥10 mm in size was 14.6% and 10.2% respectively. In contrast, that was a significant risk factor in the No-HB group (OR 4.71, 95% CI 1.41-21.3, P = 0.011). Activated partial thromboplastin time and international normalized ratio were in or under the therapeutic range in the HB group when PPB occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Heparin-bridging therapy is associated with a high risk of PPB regardless of polyp size.

Heparin bridge therapy and post-polypectomy bleeding

AIM

To identify risk factors for post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB), focusing on antithrombotic agents.

METHODS

This was a case-control study based on medical records at a single center. PPB was defined as bleeding that occurred 6 h to 10 d after colonoscopic polypectomy and required endoscopic hemostasis. As risk factors for PPB, patient-related factors including anticoagulants, antiplatelets and heparin bridge therapy as well as polyp- and procedure-related factors were evaluated. All colonoscopic hot polypectomies, endoscopic mucosal resections and endoscopic submucosal dissections performed between January 2011 and December 2014 were reviewed.

RESULTS

PPB occurred in 29 (3.7%) of 788 polypectomies performed during the study period. Antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents were prescribed for 210 (26.6%) patients and were ceased before polypectomy except for aspirin and cilostazol in 19 cases. Bridging therapy using intravenous unfractionated heparin was adopted for 73 patients. The univariate analysis revealed that anticoagulants, heparin bridge, and anticoagulants plus heparin bridge were significantly associated with PPB (P < 0.0001) whereas antiplatelets and antiplatelets plus heparin were not. None of the other factors including age, gender, location, size, shape, number of resected polyps, prophylactic clipping and resection method were correlated with PPB. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that anticoagulants and anticoagulants plus heparin bridge therapy were significant risk factors for PPB (P < 0.0001). Of the 29 PPB cases, 4 required transfusions and none required surgery. A thromboembolic event occurred in a patient who took anticoagulant.

CONCLUSION

Patients taking anticoagulants have an increased risk of PPB, even if the anticoagulants are interrupted before polypectomy. Heparin-bridge therapy might be responsible for the increased PPB in patients taking anticoagulants.

Recent clinical management of antithrombotic agents for gastrointestinal endoscopy after revision of guidelines in Japan

In 2012, the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) revised guidelines for the management of gastrointestinal endoscopy for patients using antithrombotic agents. The conventional guidelines emphasized reducing the bleeding risk that accompanies gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the present guidelines prioritize reduction of thromboembolism risk during discontinuation of antithrombotic agents, which is consistent with Western guidelines. When the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, the guidelines permit endoscopic biopsy and high-bleeding-risk procedures without discontinuation of selected antithrombotic agents. These guidelines created a paradigm shift that has slowly, but surely, changed clinical daily practice in Japan. As a result, endoscopic biopsy without discontinuation of antithrombotic agents has been widely accepted, although solid evidence for its support is still lacking. Additionally, feasibility of high-bleeding-risk procedures without discontinuation of selected antithrombotic agents is also controversial because evidence newly acquired after publication of the present guidelines is low in evidence level. Consequently, clinical studies with a high evidence level, including randomized controlled studies, are mandatory to establish reliable upcoming guidelines. At the same time, under the present guidelines, the accomplishment of such studies in Japan is expected.

Prevention of gastrointestinal events in patients on antithrombotic therapy in the peri-endoscopy period: review of new evidence and recommendations from recent guidelines

Management of patients on antithrombotic therapy undergoing endoscopic procedures can be challenging. Although guidelines from major gastrointestinal endoscopy societies provide useful recommendations in this regard, data are limited concerning the bleeding risk of new complex endoscopic procedures and the management of novel anticoagulants in patients needing invasive procedures. The approach to the management of antithrombotic therapy often needs to be formulated on an individual basis, especially in patients with high thrombotic risk undergoing a high-risk endoscopic procedure. In addition to the procedure-related bleeding risk, endoscopists also need to consider the urgency of the endoscopic procedure, the thromboembolic risk of the patient if antithrombotic therapy is temporarily withheld, and the timing of discontinuation/resumption of antithrombotic therapy in the decision-making process. Diagnostic endoscopic procedures with or without biopsy can often be done without interruption of antithrombotic therapy. If possible, elective procedures with high bleeding risk should be delayed in patients on antithrombotic therapy for conditions with high thrombotic risk. If high-risk procedures cannot be delayed in these patients, thienopyridines, traditional and novel anticoagulants are usually withheld, whereas aspirin withdrawal is decided on a case by case basis. In patients with high thrombotic risk, communication with the prescribing clinician before proceeding to procedures with high bleeding risk is particularly important in optimizing the peri-procedural management plan of antithrombotic therapy.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection in early gastric cancer in elderly patients and comorbid conditions

The prognosis of early gastric cancer (EGC) is good if there is no concomitant lymph node metastasis. Therefore, the early detection of EGC is important to improve the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer. In Japan, 40% to 50% of all gastric cancers are EGC, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely accepted as a local treatment for these lesions, particularly for large lesions that at one time were an indication for gastrectomy because of the difficulty of en-bloc resection. Consequently, this procedure can preserve the entire stomach and the patient's postoperative quality of life. ESD has become a general technique with improved procedures and devices, and has become the preferred treatment for EGC rather than gastrectomy. Therefore, ESD may demonstrate many advantages in patients who have several comorbidities, particularly elderly population, patients taking antithrombotic agents, or patients with chronic kidney disease, or liver cirrhosis. However, it is not yet clear whether patients with both EGC and comorbidities are feasible candidates for ESD and whether they would consequently be able to achieve a survival benefit after ESD. In this review, we discuss the clinical problems of ESD in patients with EGC and those comorbid conditions.

Management of polypectomy complications

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