RESUMO
ABSTRACT Background: Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer, and prevention relies on screening programs with resection complete resection of neoplastic lesions. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the best snare polypectomy technique for colorectal lesions up to 10 mm, focusing on complete resection rate, and adverse events. Methods: A comprehensive search using electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing hot versus cold snare resection for polyps sized up to 10 mm, and following PRISMA guidelines, a meta-analysis was performed. Outcomes included complete resection rate, en bloc resection rate, polypectomy, procedure times, immediate, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Results: Nineteen RCTs involving 8720 patients and 17588 polyps were included. Hot snare polypectomy showed a higher complete resection rate (RD, 0.02; 95%CI [+0.00,0.04]; P=0.03; I 2=63%), but also a higher rate of delayed bleeding (RD 0.00; 95%CI [0.00, 0.01]; P=0.01; I 2=0%), and severe delayed bleeding (RD 0.00; 95%CI [0.00, 0.00]; P=0.04; I 2=0%). Cold Snare was associated with shorter polypectomy time (MD -46.89 seconds; 95%CI [-62.99, -30.79]; P<0.00001; I 2=90%) and shorter total colonoscopy time (MD -7.17 minutes; 95%CI [-9.10, -5.25]; P<0.00001; I 2=41%). No significant differences were observed in en bloc resection rate or immediate bleeding. Conclusion: Hot snare polypectomy presents a slightly higher complete resection rate, but, as it is associated with a longer procedure time and a higher rate of delayed bleeding compared to Cold Snare, it cannot be recommended as the gold standard approach. Individual analysis and personal experience should be considered when selecting the best approach.
RESUMO Contexto: O câncer colorretal é o terceiro câncer mais comum na população, e a prevenção é principalmente baseada em programas de screening, com a ressecção completa de lesões neoplásicas. Múltiplas técnicas de ressecção estão disponíveis, mas ainda há controvérsias sobre a melhor abordagem, especialmente em relação à taxa de ressecção completa e à taxa de sangramento tardio. Objetivo: Nosso objetivo foi avaliar a melhor técnica de polipectomia com alça para lesões colorretais de até 10 mm. Métodos: Foi realizada uma busca abrangente em bancos de dados eletrônicos (MEDLINE e EMBASE) para identificar ensaios clínicos randomizados que comparassem a ressecção com alça quente versus alça fria para pólipos de até 10 mm, seguindo as diretrizes PRISMA. Os desfechos incluíram taxa de ressecção completa, taxa de ressecção em bloco, tempo de polipectomia, tempo total do procedimento, sangramento imediato, sangramento tardio e perfuração. Resultados: Dezenove ensaios clínicos randomizados foram incluídos, totalizando 8.720 pacientes e 17.588 pólipos. A polipectomia com alça quente foi associada a uma maior taxa de ressecção completa (RD, 0,02; IC95% [+0,00, 0,04]; P=0,03; I 2=63%), embora também tenha sido associada a uma taxa mais alta de sangramento tardio (RD 0,00; IC95% [0,00, 0,01]; P=0,01; I 2=0%) e de sangramento tardio grave (RD 0,00; IC95% [0,00, 0,00]; P=0,04; I 2=0%). A polipectomia com alça fria foi associada a um menor tempo de polipectomia (MD -46,89 segundos; IC95% [-62,99, -30,79]; P<0,00001 I 2=90%) e a um menor tempo total de colonoscopia (DM -7,17 minutos; IC95% [-9,10, -5,25]; P<0,00001 I 2=41%). Não houve diferença significativa na taxa de ressecção em bloco (RD, 0,00; IC95% [-0,01, 0,01]; P=0,20; I 2=30%) ou na taxa de sangramento imediato (RD -0,00; IC95% [-0,01, 0,00]; P=0,34; I 2=11%). Não foram relatados casos de perfuração em nenhum dos grupos. Conclusão: A polipectomia com alça quente apresenta uma taxa ligeiramente mais alta de ressecção completa, mas, como está associada a um tempo de procedimento mais longo e a uma taxa mais alta de sangramento tardio em comparação com a polipectomia com alça fria, não pode ser recomendada como a abordagem padrão. A análise individualizada e a experiência pessoal devem ser consideradas ao escolher a melhor abordagem.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Brazil has rapidly developed the second-highest number of COVID-19 cases in the world. As such, proper symptom identification, including gastrointestinal manifestations, and relationship to health outcomes remains key. We aimed to assess the prevalence and impact of gastrointestinal symptoms associated with COVID-19 in a large quaternary referral center in South America. METHODS: This was a single-center cohort study in a COVID-19 specific hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Consecutive adult patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 were included. Baseline patient history, presenting symptoms, laboratory results, and clinically relevant outcomes were recorded. Regression analyses were performed to determine significant predictors of the gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19 and hospitalization outcomes. RESULTS: Four-hundred patients with COVID-19 were included. Of these, 33.25% of patients reported ≥1 gastrointestinal symptom. Diarrhea was the most common gastrointestinal symptom (17.25%). Patients with gastrointestinal symptoms had higher rates of concomitant constitutional symptoms, notably fatigue and myalgia (p<0.05). Gastrointestinal symptoms were also more prevalent among patients on chronic immunosuppressants, ACE/ARB medications, and patient with chronic kidney disease (p<0.05). Laboratory results, length of hospitalization, ICU admission, ICU length of stay, need for mechanical ventilation, vasopressor support, and in-hospital mortality did not differ based upon gastrointestinal symptoms (p>0.05). Regression analyses showed older age [OR 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02-1.06)], male gender [OR 1.94 (95% CI, 1.12-3.36)], and immunosuppression [OR 2.60 (95% CI, 1.20-5.63)], were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSION: Based upon this Brazilian study, gastrointestinal manifestations of COVID-19 are common but do not appear to impact clinically relevant hospitalization outcomes including the need for ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or mortality.