CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2020; 08(03): E445-E455
DOI: 10.1055/a-1079-4298
Original article
Owner and Copyright © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2020

Clinical implications of decision making in colorectal polypectomy: an international survey of Western endoscopists suggests priorities for change

David J. Tate
1   Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
2   University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
5   University Hospital Gent, Gent, Belgium
,
Lobke Desomer
3   AZ Delta, Roeselare, Belgium
,
Steven J. Heitman
4   University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
,
Nauzer Forbes
4   University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
,
Nicholas G. Burgess
1   Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
,
Halim Awadie
8   Ha’Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel
,
Ian M. Gralnek
8   Ha’Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel
,
Jeroen Geldof
5   University Hospital Gent, Gent, Belgium
,
Danny De Looze
5   University Hospital Gent, Gent, Belgium
,
Douglas Rex
6   Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
,
John Anderson
7   Cheltenham General Hospital, Cheltenham, UK
,
Michael J. Bourke
1   Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
2   University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

submitted 16. Juni 2019

accepted after revision 11. November 2019

Publikationsdatum:
21. Februar 2020 (online)

Abstract

Introduction Colonoscopy prevents colorectal cancer via the detection and resection of premalignant polyps. This effect may be attenuated by variations in polypectomy, with multiple techniques available and a wide range of experience amongst endoscopists. We assessed current practice against the best available contemporary evidence.

Methods An online survey was distributed to members of the gastroenterological and surgical societies of seven countries during July 2017. Images of colorectal polyps were presented and respondents requested to provide the polypectomy technique they would employ in their daily practice. Responses were compared to the evidence-based techniques in the 2017 ESGE Colorectal Polypectomy Guideline.

Results In total, 707 endoscopists (627 physicians, 71 surgeons, 9 nurse endoscopists, median practice duration 18 years) completed the survey. Of these, 3.1 % selected hot biopsy forceps and 5.2 % hot snare polypectomy (without submucosal lifting) to remove a 3 mm ascending colon polyp. Only 43.3 % selected cold snare polypectomy (CSP) to remove an 8 mm ascending colon polyp. Surgical referral was selected by 16.7 % of respondents for a 45 mm transverse colon polyp without endoscopic evidence of submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC). Endoscopic resection was selected by 12.0 % for an 80 mm sigmoid polyp with imaging consistent with deep SMIC, and a further 26.4 % selected tertiary endoscopist referral, suggesting they had not appreciated that it was endoscopically unresectable.

Conclusion CSP is underutilized for small polyp resection despite its favorable safety and efficacy. Benign polyps are commonly referred for surgery and overt SMIC is underappreciated using endoscopic imaging. Addressing these issues may reduce diathermy-related adverse events, surgery, and unnecessary colonoscopic procedures for patients and reduce rates of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer.

Supplementary material

 
  • References

  • 1 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. NEJM 1993; 329: 1977-1981
  • 2 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. NEJM 2012; 366: 687-696
  • 3 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR. et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. NEJM 2014; 370: 1298-1306
  • 4 Pohl H, Srivastava A, Bensen SP. et al. Incomplete polyp resection during colonoscopy – Results of the complete adenoma resection (CARE) study. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 74-80.e1
  • 5 Suzuki S, Gotoda T, Kusano C. et al. Width and depth of resection for small colorectal polyps: hot versus cold snare polypectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 1095-1103
  • 6 Shinozaki S, Kobayashi Y, Hayashi Y. et al. Efficacy and safety of cold versus hot snare polypectomy for resecting small colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 592-599
  • 7 Papastergiou V, Paraskeva KD, Fragaki M. et al. Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 6–10 mm: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 403-411
  • 8 Jung YS, Park CH, Nam E. et al. Comparative efficacy of cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive colorectal polyps: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2018; 32: 1149-1159
  • 9 Maruoka D, Arai M, Akizue N. et al. Residual adenoma after cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal adenomas: a prospective clinical study. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 693-700
  • 10 Dwyer JP, Tan JYC, Urquhart P. et al. A prospective comparison of cold snare polypectomy using traditional or dedicated cold snares for the resection of small sessile colorectal polyps. Endosc Int Open 2017; 5: E1062-1068
  • 11 Ferlitsch M, Moss A, Hassan C. et al. Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 270-297
  • 12 Burgess NG, Bahin FF, Bourke MJ. Colonic polypectomy (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 813-835
  • 13 Hewett DG. Colonoscopic polypectomy. Current techniques and controversies. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2013; 42: 443-458
  • 14 Lee CK, Shim J-J, Jang JY. Cold snare polypectomy vs. Cold forceps polypectomy using double-biopsy technique for removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 1593-1600
  • 15 Ichise Y, Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y. et al. Prospective randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy and conventional polypectomy for small colorectal polyps. Digestion 2011; 84: 78-81
  • 16 Metz AJ, Moss A, McLeod D. et al. A blinded comparison of the safety and efficacy of hot biopsy forceps electrocauterization and conventional snare polypectomy for diminutive colonic polypectomy in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 484-490
  • 17 Komeda Y, Kashida H, Sakurai T. et al. Removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: A prospective randomized clinical trial between cold snare polypectomy and hot forceps biopsy. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23: 328-335
  • 18 Ahlenstiel G, Hourigan LF, Brown G. et al. Actual endoscopic versus predicted surgical mortality for treatment of advanced mucosal neoplasia of the colon. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 668-676
  • 19 Jayanna M, Burgess NG, Singh R. et al. Cost analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection vs surgery for large laterally spreading colorectal lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 271-272
  • 20 Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ. et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1909-1918
  • 21 Moss A, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF. et al. Long-term adenoma recurrence following wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) for advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia is infrequent: results and risk factors in 1000 cases from the Australian Colonic EMR (ACE) study. Gut 2015; 64: 57-65
  • 22 Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y, Kajiyama M. et al. Removal of small colorectal polyps in anticoagulated patients: A prospective randomized comparison of cold snare and conventional polypectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 417-423
  • 23 Hassan C, Repici A, Sharma P. et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut 2016; 65: 806-820
  • 24 Keswani RN, Law R, Ciolino JD. et al. Adverse events after surgery for nonmalignant colon polyps are common and associated with increased length of stay and costs. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 296-303.e1
  • 25 Peery AF, Cools KS, Strassle PD. et al. Increasing rates of surgery for patients with nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the United States. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 1352-1353
  • 26 Barret M, Boustiere C, Canard J-M. et al. Factors associated with adenoma detection rate and diagnosis of polyps and colorectal cancer during colonoscopy in France: Results of a prospective, nationwide survey. PLoS One 2013; 8: e68947
  • 27 Geraghty J, O’Toole P, Anderson J. et al. National survey to determine current practices, training and attitudes towards advanced polypectomy in the UK. Frontline Gastroenterol 2015; 6: 85-93
  • 28 Chandran S, Parker F, Vaughan R. et al. The current practice standard for colonoscopy in Australia. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 473-479
  • 29 Whitson MJ, Bodian CA, Aisenberg J. et al. Is production pressure jeopardizing the quality of colonoscopy? A survey of U.S. endoscopists’ practices and perceptions. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 641-648
  • 30 Pedersen IB, Løberg M, Hoff G. et al. Polypectomy techniques among gastroenterologists in Norway – a nationwide survey. Endosc Int Open 2018; 06: E812-E820
  • 31 Carter D, Beer-Gabel M, Zbar A. et al. A survey of colonoscopic polypectomy practice amongst Israeli gastroenterologists. Ann Gastroenterol 2013; 26: 135-140