RESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. RESULTS: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01936948.
Assuntos
Pólipos do Colo/cirurgia , Eletrocirurgia/efeitos adversos , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Idoso , Colo/diagnóstico por imagem , Colo/patologia , Colo/cirurgia , Pólipos do Colo/diagnóstico , Pólipos do Colo/patologia , Colonoscopia , Eletrocirurgia/instrumentação , Eletrocirurgia/métodos , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/instrumentação , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Recidiva , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM : Delayed bleeding is a common adverse event following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal polyps. Prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of nonpedunculated polyps larger than 20 mm reduces the incidence of severe delayed bleeding, especially in proximal polyps. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with complete prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of large polyps. METHODS : This is a post hoc analysis of the CLIP study (NCT01936948). All patients randomized to the clip group were included. Main outcome was complete clip closure of the mucosal resection defect. The defect was considered completely closed when no remaining mucosal defect was visible and clips were less than 1 cm apart. Factors associated with complete closure were evaluated in multivariable analysis. RESULTS : In total, 458 patients (age 65, 58â% men) with 494 large polyps were included. Complete clip closure of the resection defect was achieved for 338 polyps (68.4â%); closure was not complete for 156 (31.6â%). Factors associated with complete closure in adjusted analysis were smaller polyp size (odds ratio 1.06 for every millimeter decrease [95â% confidence interval 1.02-1.08]), good access (OR 3.58 [1.94-9.59]), complete submucosal lifting (OR 2.28 [1.36-3.90]), en bloc resection (OR 5.75 [1.48-22.39]), and serrated histology (OR 2.74 [1.35-5.56]). CONCLUSIONS : Complete clip closure was not achieved for almost one in three resected large nonpedunculated polyps. While stable access and en bloc resection facilitate clip closure, most factors associated with clip closure are not modifiable. This highlights the need for alternative closure options and measures to prevent bleeding.
Assuntos
Pólipos do Colo , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa , Idoso , Pólipos do Colo/cirurgia , Colonoscopia , Ressecção Endoscópica de Mucosa/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Instrumentos CirúrgicosRESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT01936948.
Assuntos
Colectomia/efeitos adversos , Pólipos do Colo/cirurgia , Colonoscopia/efeitos adversos , Técnicas Hemostáticas/instrumentação , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Instrumentos Cirúrgicos , Idoso , Colectomia/métodos , Pólipos do Colo/patologia , Desenho de Equipamento , Feminino , Técnicas Hemostáticas/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , América do Norte , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Fatores de Risco , Espanha , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoAssuntos
Colite Microscópica/patologia , Biópsia , Colonoscopia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
Ischemic colitis (IC) is the most common type of intestinal ischemia, with a vast clinical spectrum of injury ranging from mild and transient ischemia to acute fulminant colitis. The pattern of injury is usually segmental, but it is mainly dictated by individual anatomy, duration of ischemia, and degree of re-perfusion injury. Analysis of clinical presentation, early endoscopic evaluation, and biopsy are all essential for prevention of misdiagnosis. We present a unique case of IC with mass-like features on regular imaging, emphasizing the importance of endoscopy and biopsy for accurate diagnosis.