A132 A COLON-SPECIFIC SELECTIVE RESECTION ALGORITHM FOR LARGE NON-PEDUNCULATED POLYPS OPTIMIZES EFFICIENCY WITH HIGH TECHNICAL AND CLINICAL SUCCESS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10872133 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and aimsAll pedunculated colon polyps (PCPs) should ideally be resected en bloc for accurate histopathological evaluation. However, maneuvering a snare around the large head of a pedunculated polyp with a long, wide stalk can be technically challenging. In addition, clinically significant bleeding after snare polypectomy remains a legitimate concern. Small case series from Asia have supported the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the removal of these challenging large PCPs. However, ESD is not widely performed in the West because of its technical complexity, steep learning curve, and higher risk of adverse events when compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection. Our aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of performing en bloc resection of large PCPs using a scissor-type electrocautery ESD knife when conventional snare polypectomy is not feasible.MethodsTwo patients were found to have large PCPs with wide stalks. Attempts to maneuver a snare around the head of the PCP were unsuccessful, and the decision was to proceed with ESD using the scissor-type knife.ResultsBoth polyps were successfully resected en bloc using only the scissor-type knife. Both procedures were completed in under 20 minutes with no adverse events. Histopathology results of both polyps were consistent with tubulovillous adenoma with resection margins free of dysplasia, consistent with curative R0 resection.ConclusionEn bloc resection of large PCPs can be challenging when it is difficult to maneuver the snare around the head of the polyp. In this video, we demonstrate how a dedicated scissor-type ESD knife can facilitate the resection of these lesions. The insulated rotatable blades of the scissor-type knife allow safe and precise dissection of the stalk under direct visualization, which further permits targeted hemostasis when needed. Future studies are needed to corroborate the efficacy and safety of this device for the resection of selected colorectal lesions.
| S-EPMC7277036 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10871961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Colorectal cancer is a significant public health concern, and large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps pose a substantial risk for malignancy and incomplete resection, which may lead to interval cancer. The choice of resection technique is influenced by various factors, including polyp size, morphology, location, submucosal invasion depth and endoscopist expertise. For non-cancerous superficial large non-pedunculated polyps, conventional hot or cold snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection are common techniques for non-surgical therapeutic endoscopic resection of these polyps. This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of literature on current endoscopic resection techniques for large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps, emphasising indications, advantages, limitations and outcomes.
| S-EPMC11731078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUnderwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a recently developed technique and can be performed during water-aided or ordinary colonoscopy for the treatment of colorectal polyps. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) of small non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.MethodsPatients with small size, non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (4-9 mm in size) who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy were enrolled in this multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups, an UEMR group and a CEMR group. Efficacy and safety were compared between groups.ResultsIn the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the complete resection rate was 83.1% (59/71) in the UEMR group and 87.3% (62/71) in the CEMR group. The en-bloc resection rate was 94.4% (67/71) in the UEMR group and 91.5% (65/71) in the CEMR group (difference 2.9%; 90% CI - 4.2 to 9.9%), showed noninferiority (noninferiority margin - 5.7% < - 4.2%). No significant difference in procedure time (81 s vs. 72 s, P = 0.183) was observed. Early bleeding was observed in 1.4% of patients in the CEMR group (1/71) and 1.4% of patients in the UEMR group (1/71). None of the patients in the UEMR group complained of postprocedural bloody stool, whereas two patients in the CEMR group (2/64) reported this adverse event.ConclusionOur results indicate that UEMR is safer and just as effective as CEMR in En-bloc resection for the treatment of small colorectal polyps as such, UEMR is recommended as an alternative approach to excising small and non-pedunculated colorectal adenomatous polyps.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT03833492 . Retrospectively registered on February 7, 2019.
| S-EPMC7510164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has become a popular endoscopic resection method for large colorectal neoplasms. However, visualization can be poor during UEMR due to the presence of intestinal fluid. Gel immersion endoscopic mucosal resection (GIEMR), using a specially developed gel (Viscoclear®, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Factory, Tokushima, Japan), can improve the visual field. However, reports of GIEMR for colorectal polyps are limited. Herein, we evaluated the short-term outcomes of GIEMR for non-pedunculated colorectal neoplasms (NPCRN). This single-center, retrospective, and observational study includes 25 lesions in 20 patients with NPCRN who underwent GIEMR between January and October 2022. The short-term outcomes and adverse events were evaluated. The lesion locations were as follows: right colon, 18 lesions; left colon, 7 lesions; and rectum, none. The median tumor diameter was 15 (IQR, 10-18) mm. Histological classification was as follows: sessile serrated lesion, 9 cases; adenoma, 12 cases; and intramucosal adenocarcinoma, 4 cases. The overall en bloc resection rates and R0 resection rates were 80% (20/25) and 72% (18/25). For NPCRN in 10-19 mm, the en bloc resection rate was 75% (12/16), with an R0 resection rate of 69% (11/16). No post-polypectomy bleeding, perforation, or post-coagulation syndrome were observed. The findings of our study provide preliminary evidence of the efficacy and safety of GIEMR for NPCRN. Therefore, GIEMR may be a promising novel endoscopic resection method for NPCRN.
| S-EPMC10051202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Bleeding after colonoscopic resection of pedunculated polyps cannot be easily predicted. The aims of this study were to evaluate the blood supply in pedunculated polyps and to clarify the optimal position on the polyp stalk for snare placement to prevent post-polypectomy hemorrhage. ]In one institution, 11 pedunculated polyps from 11 patients were studied prospectively. All polyps were resected at the base of the stalk using a snare wire with electrocautery. Histologic axial sections from the apex and base of the stalk were examined with hematoxylin eosin and elastica stains. Elastica stains were used to identify blood vessels. The cross-sectional area of the stalk, total vessel area, maximum diameter of artery/arteriole lumen, number of thick (≥ 0.1 mm) vessels, and number of arteries/arterioles were measured in each section with image processing software. Wilcoxon signed-ranks test was used for comparison.The median polyp diameter was 16 mm (range 7 to 24 mm) and median length of the stalk was 11 mm (range 7 to 23 mm). Two invasive cancers (T1) were included. The maximum diameter of the arterial/arteriolar lumen was greater at the base (P = 0.0044), whereas the ratio of the vessel area to the cross-section area was greater at the apex (P = 0.016). The number of thick vessels and arteries/arterioles were equivalent between apex and base.Morphometric study of the blood supply of pedunculated polyps confirmed that the optimal site for the excision of pedunculated polyps is in the middle of the stalk.
| S-EPMC4683148 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10871999 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10872078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps ≥20 mm (LNPCPs) comprise approximately 1% of all colorectal polyps. LNPCPs more commonly contain high-grade dysplasia, covert and overt cancer. These lesions can be resected using several means, including conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), cold-snare EMR (C-EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This review aimed to provide a comprehensive, critical and objective analysis of ER techniques. Evidence-based, selective resection algorithms should be used when choosing the most appropriate technique to ensure the safe and effective removal of LNPCPs. Due to its enhanced safety and comparable efficacy, there has been a paradigm shift towards cold-snare polypectomy (CSP) for the removal of small polyps (<10 mm). This technique is now being applied to the management of LNPCPs; however, further research is required to define the optimal LNPCP subtypes to target and the viable upper size limit. Adjuvant techniques, such as thermal ablation of the resection margin, significantly reduce recurrence risk. Bleeding risk can be mitigated using through-the-scope clips to close defects in the right colon. Endoscopic surveillance is important to detect recurrence and synchronous lesions. Recurrence can be readily managed using an endoscopic approach.
| S-EPMC10417738 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11842907 | biostudies-literature