Safety and efficacy of low-power pure-cut hot snare polypectomy for small nonpedunculated colorectal polyps compared with conventional resection methods: A propensity score matching analysis.

Objectives: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely performed for small colorectal polyps. However, small colorectal polyps sometimes include high-grade adenomas or carcinomas that require endoscopic resection with electrocautery. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel resection technique, hot snare polypectomy with low-power pure-cut current (LPPC-HSP) for small colorectal polyps, compared with CSP and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Methods: Records of patients who underwent CSP, EMR, or LPPC-HSP for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps less than 10 mm between April 2021 and March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. We analyzed and compared the treatment outcomes of CSP and EMR with those of LPPC-HSP using propensity score matching. Results: After propensity score matching of 396 pairs, an analysis of CSP and LPPC-HSP indicated that LPPC-HSP had a significantly higher R0 resection rate (84% vs. 68%; p < 0.01). Delayed bleeding was observed in only two cases treated with CSP before matching. Perforation was not observed with either treatment. After propensity score matching of 176 pairs, an analysis of EMR and LPPC-HSP indicated that their en bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different (99.4% vs. 100%, p = 1.00; 79% vs. 81%, p = 0.79). Delayed bleeding and perforation were not observed with either treatment. Conclusions: The safety of LPPC-HSP was comparable to that of CSP. The treatment outcomes of LPPC-HSP were comparable to those of conventional EMR for small polyps. These results suggest that this technique is a safe and effective treatment for nonpedunculated polyps less than 10 mm.

Colorectal Post-polypectomy Bleeding in Outpatient versus Inpatient Treatment: Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Objectives: Delayed bleeding is the most frequent adverse event associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) of colorectal polyps. However, whether the incidence of delayed bleeding differs between outpatient and inpatient treatment is unknown. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate delayed bleeding rates between outpatient and inpatient endoscopic treatments and clarify the safety of outpatient treatment. Methods: We enrolled 469 patients (1077 polyps) and 420 patients (1080 polyps) in the outpatient and inpatient groups, respectively, who underwent EMR or HSP for colorectal polyps at our institution between April 2020 and May 2023. Using propensity score matching, we evaluated the delayed bleeding rates between the two groups. Delayed bleeding was defined as a hemorrhage requiring endoscopic hemostasis occurring within 14 days of the procedure. Results: Propensity score matching created 376 (954 polyps) matched patient pairs. The median maximum diameter of polyps removed was 10 mm in both groups. Delayed bleeding rates per patients were 1.3% (5/376) in the outpatient group and 2.9% (11/376) in the inpatient group (P=0.21). In term of per polyp, early delayed bleeding (occurring within 24 hours) rates were higher in the inpatient group than outpatient group (0.2% [2/954] vs. 1.1% [10/954], respectively; P=0.04). No severe bleeding requiring a transfusion occurred in either group. Conclusions: Outpatient endoscopic treatment did not increase delayed bleeding compared with inpatient treatment. Outpatient treatment would be safe and common for the removal of colorectal polyps.

Cold snare polypectomy: A closer look at the efficacy and limitations for polyps 10-20 mm in size.

Current guidelines recommend cold snare polypectomy for polyps less than 10 mm in size. Conversely, endoscopic mucosal resection is still the preferred technique for larger polyps. Concerns regarding cold snare polypectomy for larger polyps revolve around the difficulty in conducting en-bloc resection (resulting in piecemeal removal), and the potential for local residual polyp tissue and a high rate of recurrence. On the other hand, cold snare technique has the advantages of shortening procedure time, reducing delayed bleeding risks and lowering cost of treatment. Numerous ongoing and recent studies are focused on evaluating the risks and benefits of this technique for polyps larger than 10 mm, with the goal of providing clear guidelines in the near future. The aim of this editorial is to provide our readers with an overview regarding this subject and the latest developments surrounding it.

Pleomorphic leiomyosarcoma of the maxilla with metastasis to the colon: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Pleomorphic leiomyosarcomas make up around 8.6% of all leiomyosarcomas. They behave aggressively and often have poor prognoses. They can affect the gastrointestinal tract and retroperitoneum. To date, pleomorphic leiomyosarcoma involving the mesocolon have been reported in nine patients. CASE SUMMARY: The patient was a 44-year-old man with a history of pleomorphic leiomyosarcoma of the left maxilla with metastasis to the lung and liver. His most recent positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scan showed uptake in the ascending and transverse colons. A colonoscopy revealed a 5.0 cm × 3.5 cm × 3.0 cm pedunculated polyp in the ascending colon. The polyp was removed using hot snare polypectomy technique and retrieved with Rothnet. Histopathologic examination of the polyp showed a metastatic pleomorphic leiomyosarcoma. CONCLUSION: Uptake(s) on PET-CT in a patient with pleomorphic leiomyosarcoma should raise suspicion for metastasis.

Effect of Cold Versus Hot Snare Polypectomy on Colon Postpolypectomy Bleeding in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who undergo polypectomy may experience postpolypectomy bleeding. To reduce the risk of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding among the general population, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is recommended for removing colon polyps smaller than 1 cm. Nevertheless, only few studies have examined the effect of CSP on patients with ESRD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with ESRD who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy for polyps larger than 5 mm at a Taiwanese university hospital from January 2014 to January 2023. The main outcome was delayed postpolypectomy bleeding within 30 days. Multivariate analysis was conducted to adjust for major confounders. RESULTS: A total of 557 patients with ESRD underwent colonoscopic polypectomy during the study period: 201 underwent CSP and 356 underwent hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Delayed postpolypectomy bleeding occurred in 27 patients (4.8%). The rate of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding was lower in patients with ESRD who underwent CSP than in those who underwent HSP (1.9% vs. 6.4%, P = 0.022). The percentage of patients who did not experience postpolypectomy bleeding within 30 days after CSP remained lower than that observed after HSP (P = 0.019, log-rank test). Multivariate analysis demonstrated immediate postpolypectomy bleeding and HSP to be independent risk factors for delayed postpolypectomy bleeding. A nomogram prognostic model was used to predict the potential of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding within 30 days in patients with ESRD. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HSP, CSP is more effective in mitigating the risk of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding in patients with ESRD.

Low-power pure-cut hot snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps 10-14 mm in size: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Hot snare excision using electrocautery is widely used for large colorectal polyps (>10 mm); however, adverse events occur due to deep thermal injury. Colorectal polyps measuring 10-14 mm rarely include invasive cancer. Therefore, less invasive therapeutic options for this size category are demanding. We have developed hot snare polypectomy with low-power pure-cut current (LPPC HSP), which is expected to contribute to less deep thermal damage and lower risk of adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LPPC HSP for 10-14 mm colorectal polyps, compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective, observational study, clinical outcomes of EMR and LPPC HSP for 10-14 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps between January 2021 and March 2022 were compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS: We identified 203 EMR and 208 LPPC HSP cases. After propensity score matching, the baseline characteristics between the groups were comparable, with 120 pairs. The en bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different between EMR and LPPC HSP groups (95.8% vs 97.5%, P = 0.72; 90.0% vs 91.7%, P = 0.82). The rates of delayed bleeding and perforation did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional EMR, LPPC HSP showed a similar resection ability without an increase in adverse events. These results suggest that LPPC HSP is a safe and effective treatment for 10-14 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps.

Endoscopic band ligation versus hot snare resection for hyperplastic gastric polyps in cirrhotic patients.

Managing patients with liver cirrhosis and gastric hyperplastic polyps (GHPs) is challenging. Despite being the standard technique for resection of GHPs, hot snare polypectomy (HSP) is risky in the setting of coagulation disorders associated with liver cirrhosis. The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic band ligation (EBL), compared to HSP in resecting GHPs in cirrhotic patients. One hundred consecutive adults with liver cirrhosis and sessile or pedunculated GHPs were enrolled from December 2018 to December 2020. Cases were non-blindly randomized (1 : 1) to two groups to have GHPs managed by either EBL (group I) or HSP (group II). Data of demographic, clinical, and pathological factors, hospitalization expenses and outcomes of both treatment maneuvers were collected and statistically analyzed. Upper endoscopy was repeated for all patients at 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment for recurrence detection. Between the two procedures, the mean operational time was significantly shorter in the EBL than the HSP group (15.1 ±3.80 min vs. 36.6 ±6.72 min, p < 0.001). Concerning complications, 94% of EBL cases had reported no complications compared to 78% with HSP. Bleeding occurred only with HSP (20%) with urgent need for adrenaline and/or argon plasma coagulation (p = 0.003). Regarding cost, it was significantly lower in EBL than HSP (280 ±2.02 EGP vs. 390 ±181.8 EGP, p < 0.001). However, the recurrence rate of GHPs and number of needed sessions were not significantly different. EBL proved to be a safer, more rapid, and economic maneuver when compared to HSP on resecting GHPs in patients with liver cirrhosis.

An Asymptomatic Patient with Colonic Leiomyoma.

Subepithelial lesions (SELs) originating from muscularis mucosae of the colon are very rare findings on endoscopy. Appropriate management of SELs involves making a correct diagnosis and estimating their malignant potential. In this case study, a 58-year-old Saudi man presented with a small, 8-mm sigmoid polyp during screening colonoscopy. The polyp was removed by hot snare polypectomy and sent to pathology laboratory. Report showed an unremarkable colonic mucosa and underlying well-circumscribed submucosal lesion composed of monotonous spindle cells. Immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis ruled out CD117-/DOG1-positive GIST and confirmed the lesion as leiomyomatous polyp. Colonic leiomyomas are usually benign and often asymptomatic and discovered during CRC screening procedures. Diagnosis is made on histology/IHC analysis since endoscopically they might be indistinguishable from other SELs. Conventional polypectomy is an appropriate treatment for small colonic leiomyoma and these benign lesions typically do not recur.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cold snare polypectomy and hot snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has become increasingly utilized to resect colorectal polyps, given its efficacy and safety. This study aims to compare CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for resecting small (< 10 mm) and large (10-20 mm) colorectal lesions. METHODS: Relevant publications were obtained from Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. The publication search was limited by English-language and human studies. Pooled mean difference and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled OR of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) in the CSP group versus the HSP group was 0.29 (P = 0.0001, I2  = 29%). Subgroup analysis according to lesion size showed a significant reduction in the DPPB rate in lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.08, P = 0.003, I2  = 0%) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.35, P = 0.001, I2  = 27%). Pooled OR of major bleeding in the CSP group was 0.23 (P = 0.0004, I2  = 0%). Subgroup analysis by lesion size revealed a significant decrease in the rate of major bleeding in the CSP group for both lesion sizes 10-20 mm (pooled OR 0.11, P = 0.04) and < 10 mm (pooled OR 0.26, P = 0.003). Complete resection, en bloc resection, and recurrence rate were comparable in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Cold snare polypectomy was associated with a lower rate of DPPB and lower risk of major bleeding compared with HSP in both small and large polyps. CSP should be considered as the polypectomy technique of choice for colorectal polyps.

Endoscopic resection of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas: Is cold snaring the promised land?

Due to the high risk of morbidity and mortality associated with surgical resection in this tract, endoscopic resection (ER) has taken the place of surgical resection as the first line treatment for non-ampullary duodenal adenomas. However, due to the anatomical characteristics of this area, which enhance the risk of post-ER problems, ER in the duodenum is particularly difficult. Due to a lack of data, no ER technique for superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumours (SNADETs) has yet been backed by strong, high-quality evidence; yet, traditional hot snare-based techniques are still regarded as the standard treatment. Despite having a favourable efficiency profile, adverse events during duodenal hot snare polypectomy (HSP) and hot endoscopic mucosal resection, such as delayed bleeding and perforation, have been reported to be frequent. These events are primarily caused by electrocautery-induced damage. Thus, ER techniques with a better safety profile are needed to overcome these shortcomings. Cold snare polypectomy, which has already been shown as a safer, equally effective procedure compared to HSP for treatment of small colorectal polyps, is being increasingly evaluated as a potential therapeutic option for non-ampullary duodenal adenomas. The aim of this review is to report and discuss the early outcomes of the first experiences with cold snaring for SNADETs.

The efficacy and safety of cold snare versus hot snare polypectomy for endoscopic removal of small colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: The optimal technique for removing small colorectal polyps ranging from 5 to 10 mm in size remains uncertain. In order to compare the efficacy and adverse events between cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for removing small polyps, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases from 1998 to May 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for resecting small colorectal polyps. The primary outcome measure was the incomplete resection rate (IRR). RESULTS: Seven studies that met our study criteria, with a total of 3178 included polyps, were included in our analysis. The incomplete resection rate (IRR) was found to be significantly higher in the CSP group compared to the HSP group (risk ratio [RR] 1.57 [1.17-2.11], P = 0.003). Although the CSP group had a higher local recurrence rate than the HSP group, the difference was not statistically significant (RR: 3.98 [0.66-23.84], P = 0.13). The polyp retrieval rates were not significantly different between the two groups (RR: 1.00 [0.99-1], P = 0.22). Perforation was not reported or mentioned in any of the seven studies. The overall immediate bleeding rate was significantly higher in the CSP group than the HSP group (RR: 2.26 [1.63-3.14], P < 0.001), but immediate postpolypectomy bleeding requiring additional intervention was similar between the groups (RR: 1.08 [0.54-2.17], P = 0.82). The delayed bleeding rate (RR: 0.83 [0.45-1.55], P = 0.56) and specific polypectomy time (RR: -0.46 [-1.05-0.12], P = 0.12) were also similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis shows a significantly higher IRR for CSP compared with HSP when removing small polyps.

Different endoscopic treatments for small colorectal polyps: A systematic review, pair-wise, and network meta-analysis.

Background and study aims: In recent years, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has been increasingly used for small polyps (<10 mm) instead of hot snare polypectomy (HSP). However, evidence-based research regarding the effectiveness and safety of CSP and HSP are still lacking. Additionally, for 4-10 -mm non-pedunculated polyps, the polyp removal method is still controversial. Therefore, it is clinically significant to conduct pair-wise and network meta-analyses to assess such resection methods. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Only studies that involved the resection of polyps <10 mm were included. Outcomes included the complete resection rate, polyp retrieval rate, procedure-related complications, and procedure times. Results: Overall, 23 RCTs (5,352 patients) were identified. In meta-analysis compared CSP versus HSP for polyps <10 mm, CSP showed lower complete resection rate than HSP although with no statistically significant difference [odds ratio (OR): 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-1.06]. CSP showed a lower risk of major post-polypectomy complications compared to HSP (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.11-0.73). In the network meta-analysis for 4-10 mm non-pedunculated polyps, HSP, and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) showed a higher complete resection rate than CSP (OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.3-9.2 vs. OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.0-10) but a significantly longer time than CSP (WMD: 16.55 s, 95% CI [7.48 s, 25.25 s], p < 0.001), (WMD: 48.00 s, 95% CI [16.54 s, 79.46 s], p = 0.003). Underwater CSP ranked third for complete resection with no complications. Conclusion: For <10 mm polyps, CSP is safer than HSP, especially for patients taking antithrombotic drugs. For 4-10 mm non-pedunculated polyps, HSP, and EMR have higher complete resection rates than CSP. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022315575.

Comparison study colonic polypectomy / Монголын Анагаах Ухаан

Introduction@#Colorectal cancer remains one of the critical healthcare challenges nowadays. There are a lot of studies done on colonic polypectomy around the world, and mostly diagnosis with dysplasia change, so we consider to chose to study this topic.@*Aim@#In this study, we aimed to compare the between cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) of removing colon polyps. This method helped us to investigate which of the two methods is most prevalent for polypectomy.@*Materials and Method@#The research was carried out using a targeted sampling method from the cases where colonoscopy was performed between 2022 and 2023, based on the Center for Imaging Diagnostics and Pathology of Third General Hospital of Mongolia with a colon polyps less than 5mm in size should be removed using the cold snare method according to the recommendation, and polyps between 5-10 mm should be removed using the hot snare method. After polypectomy, we assessed deep mucosal lesions using the Sydney classification.@*Result@#The average age of the 81 cases included in the study was 57.9 years, and the male-female ratio was 1:1.2.149 cases (75.6%) of slightly elevated type 0-IIa according to the Paris classification, according to the morphological structure revealed by endoscopy, while 79 cases (75.6%) were tubular adenoma according to histological analysis. (38.9%), low grade dysplasia 52 (25.6%) and high grade dysplasia 3 (1.5%) cases are noteworthy. Average polyp was 5-9 mm. Most of polyps removed was left side of colon especially in sigmoid colon. Bleeding rate was higher in hot snare method 11.5%. (1/149, 0.7%, 5/52, 9.6%; P = 0.6). There was no recurrent rate and no perforation in our study. @*Conclusions@#In our study, average size of 5-9 mm were removed and slightly elevated (0-IIa), sessile (0-Is) type of polyps were commonly found in the sigmoid colon. There is a higher risk of bleeding due to mucosal damage in hot snare polypectomy. A combination of hot and cold methods is equally effective for resection of colon pollyps up to 1 cm in size.

Effect of cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer remains a considerable challenge in healthcare nowadays. Approximately 60%-80% of colorectal cancer is caused by intestinal polyps, and resection of intestinal polyps has been proved to reduce the incidence of colorectal cancer. The vast majority of intestinal polyps can be found during colonoscopy and removed endoscopically. Therefore, more attention has been paid to the development of endoscopic resection of intestinal polyps. In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of CSP and HSP for colorectal polyps. METHODS: Between January and December 2020, 301 patients with colorectal polyps 4-9 mm in diameter were treated with endoscopic therapy in our hospital, and were divided into the CSP group (n = 154) and HSP group (n = 147). The operating time, incidence of bleeding and perforation, use of titanium clips, and complete resection rate were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: We included 249 patients (301 polyps). No differences in gender, age, and polyp size, location, shape and type were observed between the CSP and HSP groups, and the resection rates in these two groups were 93.4% and 94.5%, respectively, with no significant difference. The use of titanium clips was 15.6% and 95.9%, the operating time was 3.2 ± 0.5 min and 5.6 ± 0.8 min, the delayed bleeding rate was 0% and 2.0%, and delayed perforation was 0% and 0.7%, in the CSP and HSP groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: For sessile colorectal polyps < 10 mm, CSP had the same resection rate of impaired tissue integrity as traditional HSP had. The rate of complications was lower in the CSP group. CSP is a safe and effective method for polypectomy.

Polypectomy for Diminutive and Small Colorectal Polyps.

Diminutive and small colorectal polyps are common findings during colonoscopies, and rarely contain dysplastic elements and progress to colorectal cancer. With improving technology and the advent of artificial intelligence, detection rates of small or diminutive polyps and adenomas are rising, resulting in increasing costs associated with colonoscopy. Incomplete resection rates are an outcome of interest because it correlates with interval colorectal cancer. More effort is warranted to standardize training programs and sensitize endoscopists to the importance of personal performance as a quality metric of colonoscopy. This article reviews indications, methods, and recent developments in polypectomy for small and diminutive polyps.

Endoscopic follow-up of mucosal defect after hot versus cold snare polypectomy in animal model.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has received increasing attention in recent years, but few studies have assessed defect repair after polypectomy. Therefore, we compared the repair of mucosal defect after CSP and hot snare polypectomy (HSP) in a rabbit model. METHODS: Resection of normal colonic mucosa using both HSP and CSP were performed in 40 male New Zealand white rabbits by an experienced endoscopist. Follow-up colonoscopy was performed after 7 and 15 days by another endoscopist. We assessed mucosal defect repair, status of healing, scar formation, and intraoperative or delayed complications (including perforation and bleeding). RESULTS: Eight animals died of intraoperative or delayed perforation; follow-up colonoscopy was performed in 32 animals. On follow-up colonoscopy at 7 days after operation, 78.1% cases in the CSP group showed healing of mucosal defect compared with none in the HSP group (P < 0.001); mucosal repair score in the CSP group was significantly higher than HSP group (P < 0.001). On follow-up colonoscopy at 15 days, mucosal defect after CSP had completely healed in all cases (100%) versus 96.9% after HSP (P = 0.313). Among these healed defects, scar formation was observed in 2 of 32 cases in the CSP group compared with 19 of 31 in the HSP group (P < 0.001). Intraoperative perforation rate was significantly higher in the HSP group (15% vs 2.5%; P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal defect repair after CSP is quicker compared with HSP and is more likely to result in scarless healing. HSP is more likely to cause perforation in the thin colon walls.

Endoscopic resection of a duodenal duplication cyst: A case report.

A duodenal duplication cyst (DDC) is a rare congenital anomaly. Gastrointestinal duplication cysts are traditionally treated by complete surgical resection due to the potential precancerous conditions. Here, we describe an asymptomatic DDC that was successfully treated using endoscopic resection. A submucosal tumor in the descending portion of the duodenum was detected in a 71-year-old female during a regular checkup at our hospital. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy showed a 10-mm pedunculated submucosal tumor. Endoscopic ultrasonography revealed a 10-mm cystic tumor of low echogenicity that included nodules and debris. Endoscopic resection with hot snare polypectomy was performed for diagnosis and treatment. The postoperative course was uneventful. Histologic examination revealed that the cystic tumor was a DDC. Endoscopic resection is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive alternative to surgical resection for small DDCs with malignant potential.

Influence of early colorectal cancer component on the positive margins after endoscopic resection: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic treatment methods for early colorectal cancer (ECRC) mainly depend on the size and morphology. It is unclear whether different endoscopic resection methods could achieve curative resection for ECRC confined in the mucosa. The study was designed to compare the rate of positive vertical margin (VM) of ECRC with advanced adenomas (AAs) including adenoma > 1 cm, villous adenoma, high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia/dysplasia stratified by different endoscopic resection methods. METHODS: Rate of positive VM for 489 ECRCs including Intramucosal (pTis) and superficial submucosal invasion (pT1) carcinomas were compared with those of 753 AAs stratified by different endoscopic resection methods using Chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic model was performed to investigate the risk factors of positive VM for different endoscopic resection methods. RESULTS: The pTis ECRC exhibited a similar rate of positive VM as that of AAs for en bloc hot snare polypectomy (HSP, 0% Vs. 0.85%, P = 0.617), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR, 0.81% vs. 0.25%, P = 0.375) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD, 1.82% Vs. 1.02%, P = 0.659). The pTis carcinoma was not found to be a risk factor for positive VM by en bloc EMR (P = 0.349) or ESD (P = 0.368). The en bloc resection achieved for pT1a carcinomas exhibited similar to positive VM achieved through ESD (2.06% Vs. 1.02%, P = 1.000) for AAs. Nonetheless, EMR resulted in higher risk of positive VM (5.41% Vs. 0.25%, P < 0.001) for pT1a carcinomas as compared to AAs. The pT1a invasion was identified as a risk factor for positive VM in polyps with en bloc EMR (odds ratio = 23.90, P = 0.005) but not ESD (OR = 2.96, P = 0.396). CONCLUSION: Collectively, the pTis carcinoma was not found to be a risk factor for positive VM resected by en bloc HSP, EMR or ESD. Additionally, ESD may be preferred over EMR for pT1a carcinomas with lower rate of positive VM.

Post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome: a tricky to diagnose hot snare problem that can be eliminated thanks to cold snare revolution.

Post-polypectomy syndrome or post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome (PPCS) is a rare adverse event of thermal injury caused during hot snare aided, endoscopic mucosal resection of colon polyps. Its diagnosis is tricky as it is commonly misdiagnosed as perforation leading to unnecessary exploratory abdominal surgeries. The authors aim to present an early diagnosed and successfully treated, case of PPCS, and to highlight the difference in the safety profile of two techniques; hot snare versus cold snare polypectomy.

Cold or Hot Snare with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for 6-9 mm Colorectal Polyps: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (HS-EMR) for colorectal polyps with diameters of 6-9 mm. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 485 patients with colorectal polyps (6-9 mm in size) who were treated with CS-EMR or HS-EMR in the endoscopy center of Hangzhou Third People's Hospital from January 2017 to December 2019. Colorectal polyps were lifted by submucosal injection of normal saline. The CS-EMR group used a cold snare to remove the lifting polyps, while the HS-EMR group used a hot snare. Propensity score matching analysis with 1:1 matching and the nearest neighbor matching method were performed to ensure well-balanced characteristics of the CS-EMR and HS-EMR groups. Matching factors included age, gender, body mass index, blood routine, coagulation indicators, polyp site, size, number, and morphology. This resulted in a balanced cohort of 128 patients per group. Polyp recovery, complications, clipping for disclosure, and length of hospital stay were compared after matching. t-Tests, χ2 tests, McNemar's tests, and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison between the two groups before and after matching. Results: There were no differences between the two groups of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding (P > .05), but the CS-EMR clipping rate was lower than the HS-EMR group (P < .01). There was a higher incidence of post-polypectomy syndrome (PPS) (P = .03) and longer hospital stays (P < .01) in the HS-EMR group than the CS-EMR group. Conclusions: Compared with HS-EMR, CS-EMR is more convenient to operate, with a low incidence of PPS, clipping rates, and short hospital stays. It is a safe and effective removal method for 6-9 mm colorectal polyps.