Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 6–10 mm: a randomized trialTRIAL REGISTRATION: Dual-Center, Randomized, Prospective Trial NCT02678663 at clinicaltrials.gov
submitted 08 May 2017
accepted after revision 04 August 2017
12 September 2017 (eFirst)
Background and study aims Cold snare polypectomy is an established method for the resection of small colorectal polyps; however, significant incomplete resection rates still leave room for improvement. We aimed to assess the efficacy of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR), compared with hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR), for nonpedunculated polyps sized 6 – 10 mm.
Patients and methods This study was a dual-center, randomized, noninferiority trial. Consecutive adult patients with at least one nonpedunculated polyp sized 6 – 10 mm were enrolled. Eligible polyps were randomized (1:1) to be treated with either CS-EMR or HS-EMR. Both methods involved submucosal injection of a methylene blue-tinted normal saline solution. The primary noninferiority end point was histological eradication evaluated by postpolypectomy biopsies (noninferiority margin – 10 %). Secondary outcomes included occurrence of intraprocedural bleeding, clinically significant postprocedural bleeding, and perforation.
Results Among 689 patients screened, 155 patients with 164 eligible polyps were included (CS-EMR n = 83, HS-EMR n = 81). The overall rate of histological complete resection was 92.8 % in the CS-EMR group and 96.3 % in the HS-EMR group (difference 3.5 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI] – 4.15 to 11.56), showing noninferiority of CS-EMR compared with HS-EMR. CS-EMR was shown to be noninferior both for polyps measuring 6 – 7 mm (CS-EMR 93.3 %; HS-EMR 100 %; 95 %CI – 7.95 to 21.3) and those of 8 – 10 mm (92.5 % vs. 94.7 %, respectively; 95 %CI – 7.91 to 13.16). Rates of intraprocedural bleeding were similar between the two groups (CS-EMR 3.6 %, HS-EMR 1.2 %; P = 0.30). No clinically significant postprocedural bleeding or perforation occurred in either group.
Conclusions CS-EMR appears to be a valuable modification of the standard cold snare technique, obviating the need to use diathermy for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 6 – 10 mm.
- 1 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
- 2 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
- 3 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH. et al. Systematic review: distribution of advanced neoplasia according to polyp size at screening colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 31: 210-217
- 4 Regula J, Rupinski M, Kraszewska E. et al. Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 1863-1872
- 5 Farrar WD, Sawhney MS, Nelson DB. et al. Colorectal cancers found after a complete colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 1259-1264
- 6 Pabby A, Schoen RE, Weissfeld JL. et al. Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary Polyp Prevention Trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 385-391
- 7 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 e71
- 8 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
- 9 Paspatis GA, Tribonias G, Konstantinidis K. et al. A prospective randomized comparison of cold vs hot snare polypectomy in the occurrence of postpolypectomy bleeding in small colonic polyps. Colorectal Dis 2011; 13: e345-348
- 10 Repici A, Hassan C, Vitetta E. et al. Safety of cold polypectomy for <10mm polyps at colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 27-31
- 11 Aslan F, Camci M, Alper E. et al. Cold snare polypectomy versus hot snare polypectomy in endoscopic treatment of small polyps. Turkish J Gastroenterol 2014; 25: 279-283
- 12 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
- 13 Horiuchi A, Hosoi K, Kajiyama M. et al. Prospective, randomized comparison of 2 methods of cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 686-692
- 14 Anderloni A, Jovani M, Hassan C. et al. Advances, problems, and complications of polypectomy. Clin Exp Gastroenterol 2014; 7: 285-296
- 15 ASGE Technology Committee, Hwang JH, Konda V et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 215-226
- 16 Horiuchi A, Makino T, Kajiyama M. et al. Comparison between endoscopic mucosal resection and hot snare resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 646-651
- 17 Tutticci N, Burgess NG, Pellise M. et al. Characterization and significance of protrusions in the mucosal defect after cold snare polypectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 523-528
- 18 [Anonymous]. The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: S3-43
- 19 Bosman F, Carneiro F, Hruban R. et al. WHO classification of tumors of the digestive system. 4th edn. France: IARC; 2010
- 20 Hewett DG. Cold snare polypectomy: optimizing technique and technology (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 693-696
- 21 Paraskeva KD, Tribonias G, Papastergiou V. et al. In search of the optimal technique to overcome cold polypectomy cutting failure: pulling up may be better than resnaring (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 854-855
- 22 Kim JS, Lee BI, Choi H. et al. Cold snare polypectomy versus cold forceps polypectomy for diminutive and small colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 741-747
- 23 Din S, Ball AJ, Riley SA. et al. A randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy versus a suction pseudopolyp technique. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 1005-1010
- 24 Park SK, Ko BM, Han JP. et al. A prospective randomized comparative study of cold forceps polypectomy by using narrow-band imaging endoscopy versus cold snare polypectomy in patients with diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 527-532 e521
- 25 Lee CK, Shim JJ, 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
- 26 Matsuura N, Takeuchi Y, Yamashina T. et al. Incomplete resection rate of cold snare polypectomy: a prospective single-arm observational study. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 251-257
- 27 von Renteln D, Pohl H. Pushing the limit: how to get the most out of cold snares. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 1217-1219
- 28 Efthymiou M, Taylor AC, Desmond PV. et al. Biopsy forceps is inadequate for the resection of diminutive polyps. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 312-316
- 29 Lee SH, Chung IK, Kim SJ. et al. Comparison of postpolypectomy bleeding between epinephrine and saline submucosal injection for large colon polyps by conventional polypectomy: a prospective randomized, multicenter study. World J Gastroenterol 2007; 13: 2973-2977
- 30 Makino T, Horiuchi A, Kajiyama M. et al. Delayed bleeding following cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps in patients taking antithrombotic agents. J Clin Gastroenterol 2017; DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000802.
- 31 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