Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating Cold Snare and Forceps Polypectomy Among Small POLYPs in Rates of Complete Resection: The TINYPOLYP Trial.
Wei, Mike T; Louie, Christine Y; Chen, Yu; Pan, Jennifer Y; Quan, Susan Y; Wong, Robert; Brown, Ryanne; Clark, Melissa; Jensen, Kristin; Lau, Hubert; Friedland, Shai.
Afiliación
  • Wei MT; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Louie CY; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
  • Chen Y; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Pan JY; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
  • Quan SY; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Wong R; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
  • Brown R; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Clark M; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
  • Jensen K; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Lau H; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
  • Friedland S; Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 117(8): 1305-1310, 2022 08 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35467557
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Optimizing complete resection during colonoscopy is important because residual neoplastic tissue may play a role in interval cancers. The US Multi-Society Task Force recommends diminutive (≤5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) polyps be removed by cold snare polypectomy (CSP). However, evidence is less clear whether CSP retains significant advantage over cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) for polyps ≤3 mm.

METHODS:

This study is a single-center prospective noninferiority randomized clinical trial evaluating CFP and CSP for nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. Patients 18 years and older undergoing colonoscopy for any indication were recruited. During each colonoscopy, polyps underwent block randomization to removal with CFP or CSP. After polypectomy, 2 biopsies were taken from the polypectomy margin. The primary noninferiority outcome was the complete resection rate, defined by absence of residual polyp in the margin biopsies.

RESULTS:

A total of 179 patients were included. Patients had similar distribution in age, sex, race/ethnicity, as well as indication of procedure. A total of 279 polyps ≤3 mm were identified, with 138 in the CSP group and 141 in the CFP group. Mean polypectomy time was longer for CSP compared with CFP (42.3 vs 23.2 seconds, P < 0.001), although a higher proportion of polyps removed by CFP were removed in more than 1 piece compared with CSP (15.6 vs 3.6%, P < 0.001). There were positive margin biopsies in 2 cases per cohort, with a complete resection rate of 98.3% in both groups. There was no significant difference in cohorts in complete resection rates (difference in complete resection rates was 0.057%, 95% confidence interval -4.30% to 4.53%), demonstrating noninferiority of CFP compared with CSP.

DISCUSSION:

Use of CFP was noninferior to CSP in the complete resection of nonpedunculated polyps ≤3 mm. CSP required significantly more time to perform compared with CFP. CFP should be considered an acceptable alternative to CSP for removal of polyps ≤3 mm.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Colorrectales / Pólipos del Colon Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Gastroenterol Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Colorrectales / Pólipos del Colon Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Gastroenterol Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos