Clip closure to prevent adverse events after EMR of proximal large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: After EMR, prophylactic clipping is often performed to prevent clinically significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) and other adverse events (AEs). Prior evidence syntheses have lacked sufficient power to assess clipping in relevant subgroups or in nonbleeding AEs. We performed a meta-analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from randomized trials assessing the efficacy of clipping to prevent AEs after EMR of proximal large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) ≥20 mm. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, and PubMed from inception to May 19, 2021. Two reviewers screened citations in duplicate. Corresponding authors of eligible studies were invited to contribute IPD. A random-effects 1-stage model was specified for estimating pooled effects, adjusting for patient sex and age and for lesion location and size, whereas a fixed-effects model was used for traditional meta-analyses. RESULTS: From 3145 citations, 4 trials were included, representing 1248 patients with proximal LNPCPs. The overall rate of CSPEB was 3.5% and 9.0% in clipped and unclipped patients, respectively. IPD were available for 1150 patients, in which prophylactic clipping prevented CSPEB with an odds ratio (OR) of .31 (95% confidence interval [CI], .17-.54). Clipping was not associated with perforation or abdominal pain, with ORs of .78 (95% CI, .17-3.54) and .67 (95% CI, .20-2.22), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic clipping is efficacious in preventing CSPEB after EMR of proximal LNPCPs. Therefore, clip closure should be considered a standard component of EMR of LNPCPs in the proximal colon.

Timing of Resumption of Anticoagulation After Polypectomy and Frequency of Post-procedural Complications: A Post-hoc Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Optimal timing for anticoagulation resumption after polypectomy is unclear. We explored the association between timing of anticoagulation resumption and occurrence of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) and thromboembolic (TE) events. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of patients in an earlier study whose anticoagulants were interrupted for polypectomy. We compared rates of clinically important delayed PPB and TE events in relationship to timing of anticoagulant resumption. Late resumption was defined as > 2 days after polypectomy. RESULTS: Among 437 patients, 351 had early and 86 late resumption. Compared to early resumers, late resumers had greater polypectomy complexity. PPB rate was higher (but not significantly) in the late versus early resumers (2.3% vs. 0.9%, 1.47% greater, 95% CI [- 2.58 to 5.52], p = 0.26). TE events were more frequent in late versus early resumers [0% vs. 1.2% at 30 days, 0% vs. 2.3%, 95% CI 0.3-8, (p = 0.04) at 90 days]. On multivariate analysis, timing of restarting anticoagulation was not a significant predictor of PPB (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.61-1.44, p = 0.897). Significant predictors were number of polyps ≥ 1 cm (OR 4.14, 95% CI 1.27-13.66, p = 0.014) and use of fulguration (OR 11.43, 95% CI 1.35-80.80, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians delayed anticoagulation resumption more commonly after complex polypectomies. The timing of restarting anticoagulation was not a significant risk factor for PPB and late resumers had significantly higher rates of TE events within 90 days. Considering the potentially catastrophic consequences of TE events and the generally benign outcome of PPBs, clinicians should be cautious about delaying resumption of anticoagulation after polypectomy.