AI Article Synopsis

  • Incomplete resection rates vary among endoscopists, making it important to evaluate different removal techniques for small colorectal polyps.
  • This study compared the effectiveness and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR) on polyps sized 6-9 mm.
  • Results showed that CS-EMR had a 0% rate of residual adenomas and similar efficacy in resection compared to HS-EMR, suggesting CS-EMR can be a standard method for removing small colorectal polyps.

Article Abstract

Incomplete resection rates vary among endoscopists performing cold snare polypectomy. Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) is the technique of cold resection after submucosal injection to reduce incomplete resection. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CS-EMR for small colorectal polyps compared to hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR). Preplanned sample size required 70 polyps to CS-EMR group or HS-EMR group, respectively. Patients with polyps sized 6-9 mm were randomly allocated to either the CS-EMR or the HS-EMR group. The primary outcome was residual or recurrent adenoma (RAA) rate. A total of 70 and 68 polyps were resected using CS-EMR and HS-EMR, respectively. In the intention-to-treat population, the RAA rate was 0% in the CS-EMR group and 1.5% in the HS-EMR group (risk difference [RD], - 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 4.34 to 1.39). En bloc resection rate was 98.6% and 98.5% (RD, - 0.04; 95% CI - 4.12 to 4.02); the R0 resection rate was 55.7% and 82.4% (RD, - 27.80; 95% CI - 42.50 to  - 13.10). The total procedure time was 172 s (IQR, 158-189) in the CS-EMR group and 186 s (IQR, 147-216) in the HS-EMR group (median difference, - 14; 95% CI - 32 to 2). Delayed bleeding was 2.9% vs 1.5% (RD, 1.37; 95% CI - 3.47 to 6.21) in both groups, respectively. CS-EMR was non-inferior to HS-EMR for the treatment of small colorectal polyps. CS-EMR can be considered one of the standard methods for the removal of colorectal polyps sized 6-9 mm.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11369165PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71067-1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

snare endoscopic
16
endoscopic mucosal
16
mucosal resection
16
colorectal polyps
16
hs-emr group
16
cold snare
12
small colorectal
12
cs-emr group
12
resection
9
cs-emr
9

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!