Clip-assisted endoloop ligation of the mucosal defect after resection of colorectal polyps decreased postprocedural delayed bleeding.

Background: Postprocedural delayed bleeding (PDB) remains the most common major complication of colorectal polypectomy. Incomplete clip closure of mucosal defect and unclosed injured blood vessels in gaps between clips may be the risk factors for PDB. Objectives: To observe whether completely no-gap closure of mucosal defect after polypectomy can reduce PDB occurrence. Design: Single-center, retrospective case-control study. Methods: In this study based on historical comparisons of patients in 2 time periods, only the patients with polyps sized between 6 and 15 mm were included. A new clip-assisted endoloop ligation (CAEL, treatment group) method was used between January 2019 and December 2020, and a traditional simple clip closure (SCC, control) was used Between January 2017 and December 2018 to prevent PDB after polypectomy. The rate of PDB of two groups and risk factors for PDB were evaluated. Results: Totally 4560 patients were included in the study; 2418 patients belong to CAEL group, and 2142 patients belong to SCC group. The overall rate of PDB was significantly lower in CAEL group compared to SCC group (0.6% versus 1.5%, p < 0.00). On multivariate logistic analysis, CAEL was a significant independent preventive factor for PDB (odds ratio (OR), 0.092; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.029-0.3335; p = 0.000). Polyps located at rectum (colon versus rectum) represented a significant independent risk factor for PDB (OR, 11.888; 95% CI, 3.343-42.269; p = 0.001). Conclusion: Completely no-gap closure of mucosal defect after polypectomy further reduced the rate of PDB for polyps sized between 6 and 15 mm. CAEL may be a significant independent preventive factor for PDB. Polyps located at the rectum may be a significant independent risk factor for PDB.

Clip closure of defect after endoscopic resection in patients with larger colorectal tumors decreased the adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Clip closure of large colorectal mucosal defects may reduce the rate of adverse events in a cost-effective manner. OBJECTIVE: To assess the adverse events and outcomes of clip closure of defects after endoscopic resection in patients with large colorectal tumors. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled study. SETTING: Single tertiary referral center. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients with lesions measuring 1 to 4 cm who were scheduled for endoscopic resection between March 2012 and December 2014 were randomly assigned to a clip-closure group and a no-closure group. In the clip-closure group, the defect of the resection site was completely closed with an endoclip. In the no-closure group, the defect was left open. The following primary outcome measures were assessed: delayed postoperative bleeding, postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome, perforation, and abdominal pain. Secondary outcome measures of length of hospital stay, time required for procedure, and patient's satisfaction were also assessed. RESULTS: Patients and lesions had similar characteristics across both groups. For patients who underwent clip closure (n = 174), the rates of delayed postoperative bleeding (1.1% [2/174]) and postpolypectomy coagulation syndrome (0.6% [1/174]) were lower than those in the no-closure group (6.9% [12/174], P = .01 and 4.6% [8/174], P = .03). Two patients experienced perforation, 1 in each group. In the clip-closure group, 4 patients reported abdominal pain as opposed to 26 in the no-closure group (2.8% vs 16.7%, P < .01). The procedure took longer in the closure group (38.1 minutes vs 30.9 minutes, P = .04). The length of hospitalization was shorter in the closure group (3.1 days vs 4.7 days, P = .03). Total medical expense was similar between the 2 groups. Patients who underwent closure reported greater satisfaction. LIMITATION: This was a single-center analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Clip closure of endoscopic resection defects in patients with large colorectal tumors decreased the rate of procedure-related adverse events and did not increase the cost of hospitalization.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients with colorectal lesions undergoing endoscopic resection.

AIM: To investigate the effect of prophylaxis with antibiotics on clinical adverse events in patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for colorectal lesions. METHODS: From June 2011 to December 2013, a total of 428 patients were enrolled into the study, of which 214 patients admitted to hospital underwent EMR or ESD procedures. These patients were randomized to an antibiotic group, in which patients were given cefuroxime 1.5 g iv half an hour before and 6 h after surgery respectively, and a control group, in which patients were not given any antibiotic. A further 214 outpatients with small polyps treated by polypectomy were compared with controls that were matched by age and gender, and operations were performed as outpatient surgery. Recorded patient parameters were demographics, characteristics of lesions and treatment modality, and the size of the wound area. The primary outcome measures were clinical adverse events, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, hemotachezia, and fever. Secondary outcome measures were white blood cell count, C-reactive protein and blood culture. Additionlly, the relationship between the size of the wound area and clinical adverse events was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients were enrolled in this study, with 107 patients in the control group, 107 patients in the antibiotic group, and another 195 cases in the follow-up outpatient group. The patients' demographic characteristics, including age, gender, characteristics of lesions, treatment modality, and the size of the wound area were similar between the 2 groups. The rates of adverse events in the antibiotic group were significantly lower than in the control group: abdominal pain (2.8% vs 14.9%, P < 0.01), diarrhea (2.0% vs 9.3%, P < 0.05), and fever (0.9% vs 8.4%, P < 0.05) respectively. The levels of inflammatory markers also decreased significantly in the antibiotic group compared with the control group: leukocytosis (2.0% vs 11.2%, P < 0.01), and C-reactive protein (2.0% vs 10.7%, P < 0.05). Additionally, clinical adverse events were related to the size of the surgical wound area. When the surgical wound area was larger than 10 mm × 10 mm, there were more clinical adverse events. CONCLUSION: Clinical adverse events are not uncommon after EMR or ESD procedures. Prophylactic antibiotics can reduce the incidence of clinical adverse events. This should be further explored.