Histological outcomes between hot and cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps

Comparing underwater and conventional cold snare polypectomy for colorectal adenomas: Prospective randomized controlled trial

Background and study aims

In this study, we aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of underwater cold snare polypectomy (UCSP) for treating colorectal adenoma.

Patients and methods

This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial screened patients with colorectal adenomas measuring 4 to 9 mm in diameter that were identified through colonoscopies at the Department of Gastroenterology in Jianyang People's Hospital between April 2022 and October 2023. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo UCSP or cold snare polypectomy (CSP). Both groups underwent narrow-band imaging to determine international colorectal endoscopic morphology of type 2 noncancerous lesions. Following polyp removal, biopsy specimens were collected from the base and margins to assess the completeness of resection.

Results

The study included 227 polyps from 172 patients; median sizes in the UCSP (n = 122) and CSP groups (n=105) were 5 mm and 6 mm, respectively. The R0 (96.7% vs. 86.7%; P =0.005) and muscularis mucosa resection rates (68.9% vs. 43.8%; P <0.0001) were significantly higher in the UCSP group than in the CSP group. However, operative time for the UCSP group (109.5 s; 86.8-134.3 vs. 110.0 s; 83.5-143.5 P =0.890) was not significantly longer than that for the CSP group. Neither group exhibited delayed bleeding or perforations.

Conclusions

UCSP has a high R0 rate for colorectal adenomas measuring 4 to 9 mm.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cold snare polypectomy and hot snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has become increasingly utilized to resect colorectal polyps, given its efficacy and safety. This study aims to compare CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for resecting small (< 10 mm) and large (10-20 mm) colorectal lesions.

METHODS

Relevant publications were obtained from Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. The publication search was limited by English-language and human studies. Pooled mean difference and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled OR of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) in the CSP group versus the HSP group was 0.29 (P = 0.0001, I2  = 29%). Subgroup analysis according to lesion size showed a significant reduction in the DPPB rate in lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.08, P = 0.003, I2  = 0%) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.35, P = 0.001, I2  = 27%). Pooled OR of major bleeding in the CSP group was 0.23 (P = 0.0004, I2  = 0%). Subgroup analysis by lesion size revealed a significant decrease in the rate of major bleeding in the CSP group for both lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.11, P = 0.04) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.26, P = 0.003). Complete resection, en bloc resection, and recurrence rate were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cold snare polypectomy was associated with a lower rate of DPPB and lower risk of major bleeding compared with HSP in both small and large polyps. CSP should be considered as the polypectomy technique of choice for colorectal polyps.

Large polyps: Pearls for the referring and receiving endoscopist

Polyps are precursors to colorectal cancer, the third most common cancer in the United States. Large polyps, i.e.,, those with a size ≥ 20 mm, are more likely to harbor cancer. Colonic polyps can be removed through various techniques, with the goal to completely resect and prevent colorectal cancer; however, the management of large polyps can be relatively complex and challenging. Such polyps are generally more difficult to remove en bloc with conventional methods, and depending on level of expertise, may consequently be resected piecemeal, leading to an increased rate of incomplete removal and thus polyp recurrence. To effectively manage large polyps, endoscopists should be able to: (1) Evaluate the polyp for characteristics which predict high difficulty of resection or incomplete removal; (2) Determine the optimal resection technique (e.g., snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, etc.); and (3) Recognize when to refer to colleagues with greater expertise. This review covers important considerations in this regard for referring and receiving endoscopists and methods to best manage large colonic polyps.