Recurrence and Carcinogenetic Rates of Colorectal Polyps.

AIM: to determin the recurrence rate of benign recto-colonic polyps in a 5-year interval, and compare the development rate of intrapolypoid carcinomatous lesions in polypectomized versus nonpolypectomized subjects. MATERIAL AND METHOD: a group of 77 patients diagnosed with recto-colonic polypoid lesions during the period 2014-2019 underwent colonoscopy at the time of study initiation and then annually during a five-year interval. Results: The recurrence rate of polyps increased annually from 5 to 12.5%; the highest rate was noted in the last two years. The five-year cumulative risk of neoplastic lesions was 73% in patients without polypectomy and 20% among those with endoscopic resection (p 0.05). Comparing the recurrence rate of benign lesions (60%) in patients without neoplastic findings with the recurrence rate of adenomas in patients with benign lesions (40%), a higher risk of recurrence was found in the first category, and seemed to be influenced by the personal history of pre-existing adenomatous lesions. CONCLUSION: an increased risk of colorectal polyps recurrence was reported during five year follow up; moreover, during the first three years an increased risk of malignant transformation was observed among cases in which endoscopic resection was not feasible when compared to those in which complete excision was feasible.

The frequency of colorectal lesions in the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions among PERSIAN Guilan Cohort Study population (PGCS).

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of colorectal lesions in the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions among the Prospective Epidemiological Research Studies in Iran (PERSIAN )Guilan Cohort Study (PGCS) population. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 162 first-degree relatives with a history of colorectal lesions were randomly selected from 52 participants in PGCS. All subjects underwent total colonoscopy by a gastroenterologist, and a pathologist evaluated colorectal biopsies. Also, individuals' demographic information, clinical data, and dietary habits were recorded. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 56.55 ± 7.04. Of 86 colon polyps, 52 neoplastic and 34 non-neoplastic polyps were observed in 56 patients (34.6%). Individuals with age > 60 years had 3.29-fold increased odds of developing colorectal polyps (OR = 3.29, 95% CI: 1.13-9.56, P = 0.029). The smokers were 2.73 times more susceptible to developing colorectal polyps than non-smokers (OR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.24-6.02, P = 0.013). Moreover, consumption of vegetables more than three times per day was associated with decreased OR of colorectal polyp development (OR = 0.43, CI: 0.19-0.98, P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the high prevalence of neoplastic colorectal polyps among the first-degree relatives of patients with colorectal lesions, early screening is recommended for individuals with a family history of colorectal lesions.

The Association of Metabolic Risk Factors with Advanced Adenomas in Hispanic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and metabolic syndrome (MetS) have been implicated as rising risk factors for the development of colorectal cancers. A rapid increase in the prevalence of obesity and severe obesity among Hispanic patients in the United States may present substantially increased risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia in this population. Currently, there is very little research in this area. AIMS: We sought to identify metabolic risk factors for advanced adenomas (AA) in Hispanic Americans. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from the Los Angeles General (LAG) Medical Center of asymptomatic Hispanic patients above 45 years of age who underwent their first colonoscopies following a positive screening FBT. Patient demographics, metabolic characteristics, as well as colon polyp size and histology were recorded. Polyps were classified as adenomas or AA (including both high-risk adenomas and high-risk serrated polyps). Relative risk for AA was assessed by multivariate logistical regression analyses. RESULTS: Of the 672 patients in our study, 41.4% were male, 67% had adenomas, and 16% had AA. The mean BMI was 31.2 kg/m2. The mean HDL-C was 49.5 mg/dL (1.28 mmol/L) and the mean triglyceride level was 151 mg/dL. 44.6% had diabetes and 64.1% had hypertension. When comparing patients with AA to patients with no adenoma, male sex, BMI > 34.9 kg/m2, and elevated fasting triglyceride levels were associated with an increased risk of AA. FIB-4 ≥1.45 was also associated with an increased risk of AA in males. There was no significant difference in the risk of AA with diabetes, hypertension, FIB-4 score, LDL-C level, and HDL-C level. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic patients with a positive FBT were observed to have a high incidence of AA. Class II obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2), elevated triglyceride levels were identified as risk factors among males in our study. Early interventions to address these modifiable risk factors in at-risk populations, such as multi-disciplinary weight management programs for the treatment of obesity and related co-morbidities, could potentially lead to risk reduction and CRC prevention.

Deep learning system for true- and pseudo-invasion in colorectal polyps.

Over 15 million colonoscopies were performed yearly in North America, during which biopsies were taken for pathological examination to identify abnormalities. Distinguishing between true- and pseudo-invasion in colon polyps is critical in treatment planning. Surgical resection of the colon is often the treatment option for true invasion, whereas observation is recommended for pseudo-invasion. The task of identifying true- vs pseudo-invasion, however, could be highly challenging. There is no specialized software tool for this task, and no well-annotated dataset is available. In our work, we obtained (only) 150 whole-slide images (WSIs) from the London Health Science Centre. We built three deep neural networks representing different magnifications in WSIs, mimicking the workflow of pathologists. We also built an online tool for pathologists to annotate WSIs to train our deep neural networks. Results showed that our novel system classifies tissue types with 95.3% accuracy and differentiates true- and pseudo-invasions with 83.9% accuracy. The system's efficiency is comparable to an expert pathologist. Our system can also be easily adjusted to serve as a confirmatory or screening tool. Our system (available at http://ai4path.ca ) will lead to better, faster patient care and reduced healthcare costs.

Sporadic Polyps of the Colorectum.

Colorectal polyps are common, and their diagnosis and classification represent a major component of gastrointestinal pathology practice. The majority of colorectal polyps represent precursors of either the chromosomal instability or serrated neoplasia pathways to colorectal carcinoma. Accurate reporting of these polyps has major implications for surveillance and thus for cancer prevention. In this review, we discuss the key histologic features of the major colorectal polyps with a particular emphasis on diagnostic pitfalls and areas of contention.

Performance evaluation of a computer-aided polyp detection system with artificial intelligence for colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: A computer-aided detection (CAD) system was developed to support the detection of colorectal lesions by deep learning using video images of lesions and normal mucosa recorded during colonoscopy. The study's purpose was to evaluate the stand-alone performance of this device under blinded conditions. METHODS: This multicenter prospective observational study was conducted at four Japanese institutions. We used 326 videos of colonoscopies recorded with patient consent at institutions in which the Ethics Committees approved the study. The sensitivity of successful detection of the CAD system was calculated using the target lesions, which were detected by adjudicators from two facilities for each lesion appearance frame; inconsistencies were settled by consensus. Successful detection was defined as display of the detection flag on the lesion for more than 0.5 s within 3 s of appearance. RESULTS: Of the 556 target lesions from 185 cases, detection success sensitivity was 97.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95.8-98.5%). The "successful detection sensitivity per colonoscopy" was 93% (95% CI 88.3-95.8%). For the frame-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 86.6% (95% CI 84.8-88.4%), 84.7% (95% CI 83.8-85.6%), 34.9% (95% CI 32.3-37.4%), and 98.2% (95% CI 97.8-98.5%), respectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000044622).

Impact of an artificial intelligence-aided endoscopic diagnosis system on improving endoscopy quality for trainees in colonoscopy: Prospective, randomized, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate whether the use of CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) for colonoscopy improves colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees. METHODS: The patients in this multicenter randomized controlled trial were divided into Group A (observation using CAD EYE) and Group B (standard observation). Six trainees performed colonoscopies using a back-to-back method in pairs with gastroenterology experts. The primary end-point was the trainees' adenoma detection rate (ADR), and the secondary end-points were the trainees' adenoma miss rate (AMR) and Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy (ACE) tool scores. Each trainee's learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 231 patients (Group A, n = 113; Group B, n = 118). The ADR was not significantly different between the two groups. Group A had a significantly lower AMR (25.6% vs. 38.6%, P = 0.033) and number of missed adenomas per patient (0.5 vs. 0.9, P = 0.004) than Group B. Group A also had significantly higher ACE tool scores for pathology identification (2.26 vs. 2.07, P = 0.030) and interpretation and identification of pathology location (2.18 vs. 2.00, P = 0.038). For the CUSUM learning curve, Group A showed a trend toward a lower number of cases of missed multiple adenomas by the six trainees. CONCLUSION: CAD EYE did not improve ADR but decreased the AMR and improved the ability to accurately locate and identify colorectal adenomas. CAD EYE can be assumed to be beneficial for improving colonoscopy quality in gastroenterology trainees. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000044031).

Comparison of Right Colon Flat Polyp Detection Rate by Water Exchange Versus Water Immersion-pooled Results of Data File of 3 Published Reports.

GOALS: We tested the hypothesis that water exchange (WE) achieved a significantly higher right colon flat polyp detection rate (rFPDR) than water immersion (WI). BACKGROUND: Current endoscopy methods provide real-time morphology but not histopathology. Flat serrated polyps are difficult to find during colonoscopy. In 2022 2 studies reported that the serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR) significantly inversely predicted the development of interval cancers. In 2021 1 systemic review with meta-analysis showed that WE, but not WI increased SPDR. The relative contributions of WE and WI on rFPDR are unknown. STUDY: Individual patient data from 3 reports comparing air insufflation, WI, and WE were pooled. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess the factors associated with a higher rFPDR. RESULTS: The pooled data showed that the rFPDR of air insufflation, WI, and WE were 15.4%, 14.1%, and 19.4% ( P =0.009), respectively. After adjusting for age and withdrawal time, multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that WE, when compared with WI, was significantly associated with a higher rFPDR (adjusted odds ratio[aOR]=1.53, P =0.002). Analysis of data on pathology and size were omitted to avoid duplicating our earlier publications. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly higher rFPDR was achieved by WE. Water exchange rather than WI merits consideration for use to maximize rFPDR. Removal of flat polyps, and by inference serrated polyps, ensures their optimal management to minimize the occurrence of interval cancers. The potential benefit of WE in maximizing SPDR and minimizing interval cancers deserves evaluation in long-term randomized controlled studies focused on flat polyps detection.

Artificial intelligence-assisted real-time monitoring of effective withdrawal time during colonoscopy: a novel quality marker of colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The importance of withdrawal time during colonoscopy cannot be overstated in mitigating the risk of missed lesions and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. We evaluated a novel colonoscopy quality metric called the effective withdrawal time (EWT), which is an artificial intelligence (AI)-derived quantitative measure of quality withdrawal time, and its association with various colonic lesion detection rates as compared with standard withdrawal time (SWT). METHODS: Three hundred fifty video recordings of colonoscopy withdrawal (from the cecum to the anus) were assessed by the new AI model. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR) according to different quintiles of EWT. Multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for baseline covariates, was used to determine the adjusted odd ratios (ORs) for EWT on lesion detection rates, with the lowest quintile as reference. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of EWT was compared with SWT. RESULTS: The crude ADR in different quintiles of EWT, from lowest to highest, was 10.0%, 31.4%, 33.3%, 53.5%, and 85.7%. The ORs of detecting adenomas and polyps were significantly higher in all top 4 quintiles when compared with the lowest quintile. Each minute increase in EWT was associated with a 49% increase in ADR (aOR, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-1.65). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of EWT was also significantly higher than SWT on adenoma detection (.80 [95% CI, .75-.84] vs .70 [95% CI, .64-.74], P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: AI-derived monitoring of EWT is a promising novel quality indicator for colonoscopy, which is more associated with ADR than SWT.

Frequency of colorectal surveillance colonoscopies for adenomatous polyps: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to assess evidence on the frequency of polyp surveillance colonoscopies performed earlier than the recommended follow-up intervals in clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A systematic review was performed based on electronic searches in PubMed and Embase. Research articles, letters to the editors, and review articles, published before April 2022, were included. Studies that focused on the intervals of polyp surveillance in adult populations were selected. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Exposure (ROBINS-E) was used to assess the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was performed with Forest plots to illustrate the results. RESULTS: In total, 16 studies, comprising 11 172 patients from Australia, Europe, and North America, were included for analysis. The quality of the studies was moderate. Overall, 38% (95% CI: 30-47%) of colonoscopies were undertaken earlier than their respective national clinical guidelines. In risk-stratified surveillance, 10 studies contained data relating to low-risk polyp surveillance intervals and 30% (95% CI: 29-31%) of colonoscopies were performed earlier than recommended. Eight studies contained data relating to intermediate-risk polyp surveillance and 15% (95% CI: 14-17%) of colonoscopies were performed earlier than recommended. One study showed that 6% (95% CI: 4-10%) of colonoscopies performed for high-risk polyp surveillance were performed earlier than recommended. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of polyp surveillance was performed earlier than the guidelines suggested. This provides evidence of the potential overuse of healthcare resources and the opportunity to improve hospital efficiency.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Appropriate and Tailored Polypectomy: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: In this Clinical Practice Update (CPU), we provide guidance on the appropriate use of different polypectomy techniques. We focus on polyps <2 cm in size that are most commonly encountered by the practicing endoscopist, including use of classification systems to characterize polyps and various polypectomy methods. We review characteristics of polyps that require complex polypectomy techniques and provide guidance on which types of polyps require more advanced management by a therapeutic endoscopist or surgeon. This CPU does not provide a detailed review of complex polypectomy techniques, such as endoscopic submucosal dissection, which should only be performed by endoscopists with advanced training. METHODS: This expert review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute CPU Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPU Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: A structured visual assessment using high-definition white light and/or electronic chromoendoscopy and with photodocumentation should be conducted for all polyps found during routine colonoscopy. Closely inspect colorectal polyps for features of submucosally invasive cancer. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Use cold snare polypectomy for polyps <10 mm in size. Cold forceps polypectomy can alternatively be used for 1- to 3-mm polyps where cold snare polypectomy is technically difficult. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Do not use hot forceps polypectomy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Clinicians should be familiar with various techniques, such as cold and hot snare polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection, to ensure effective, safe, and optimal resection of intermediate-size polyps (10-19 mm). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Consider using lifting agents or underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for removal of sessile polyps 10-19 mm in size. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Serrated polyps should be resected using cold resection techniques. Submucosal injection may be helpful for polyps >10 mm if margins cannot be well delineated. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Use hot snare polypectomy to remove pedunculated lesions >10 mm in size. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Do not routinely use clips to close resection sites for polyps <20 mm. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Refer patients with polyps to endoscopic referral centers in the context of size ≥20 mm, challenging polypectomy location, or recurrent polyp at a prior polypectomy site. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Tattoo lesions that may need future localization at endoscopy or surgery. Tattoos should be placed in a location that will not interfere with subsequent attempts at endoscopic resection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Refer patients with nonpedunculated polyps with clear evidence of submucosally invasive cancer for surgical evaluation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Understand the endoscopy suite's electrosurgical generator settings appropriate for polypectomy or postpolypectomy thermal techniques.

Impact of computer-aided characterization for diagnosis of colorectal lesions, including sessile serrated lesions: Multireader, multicase study.

OBJECTIVES: Computer-aided characterization (CADx) may be used to implement optical biopsy strategies into colonoscopy practice; however, its impact on endoscopic diagnosis remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the additional diagnostic value of CADx when used by endoscopists for assessing colorectal polyps. METHODS: This was a single-center, multicase, multireader, image-reading study using randomly extracted images of pathologically confirmed polyps resected between July 2021 and January 2022. Approved CADx that could predict two-tier classification (neoplastic or nonneoplastic) by analyzing narrow-band images of the polyps was used to obtain a CADx diagnosis. Participating endoscopists determined if the polyps were neoplastic or not and noted their confidence level using a computer-based, image-reading test. The test was conducted twice with a 4-week interval: the first test was conducted without CADx prediction and the second test with CADx prediction. Diagnostic performances for neoplasms were calculated using the pathological diagnosis as reference and performances with and without CADx prediction were compared. RESULTS: Five hundred polyps were randomly extracted from 385 patients and diagnosed by 14 endoscopists (including seven experts). The sensitivity for neoplasia was significantly improved by referring to CADx (89.4% vs. 95.6%). CADx also had incremental effects on the negative predictive value (69.3% vs. 84.3%), overall accuracy (87.2% vs. 91.8%), and high-confidence diagnosis rate (77.4% vs. 85.8%). However, there was no significant difference in specificity (80.1% vs. 78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Computer-aided characterization has added diagnostic value for differentiating colorectal neoplasms and may improve the high-confidence diagnosis rate.

Effect of Real-Time Computer-Aided Polyp Detection System (ENDO-AID) on Adenoma Detection in Endoscopists-in-Training: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) on adenoma detection rate (ADR) among endoscopists-in-training remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial in Hong Kong between April 2021 and July 2022 (NCT04838951). Eligible subjects undergoing screening/surveillance/diagnostic colonoscopies were randomized 1:1 to receive colonoscopies with CADe (ENDO-AID[OIP-1]) or not (control) during withdrawal. Procedures were performed by endoscopists-in-training with <500 procedures and <3 years' experience. Randomization was stratified by patient age, sex, and endoscopist experience (beginner vs intermediate level, <200 vs 200-500 procedures). Image enhancement and distal attachment devices were disallowed. Subjects with incomplete colonoscopies or inadequate bowel preparation were excluded. Treatment allocation was blinded to outcome assessors. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR for different adenoma sizes and locations, mean number of adenomas, and non-neoplastic resection rate. RESULTS: A total of 386 and 380 subjects were randomized to CADe and control groups, respectively. The overall ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (57.5% vs 44.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.72; P < .001). The ADRs for <5 mm (40.4% vs 25.0%) and 5- to 10-mm adenomas (36.8% vs 29.2%) were higher in the CADe group. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group in both the right colon (42.0% vs 30.8%) and left colon (34.5% vs 27.6%), but there was no significant difference in advanced ADR. The ADRs were higher in the CADe group among beginner (60.0% vs 41.9%) and intermediate-level (56.5% vs 45.5%) endoscopists. Mean number of adenomas (1.48 vs 0.86) and non-neoplastic resection rate (52.1% vs 35.0%) were higher in the CADe group. CONCLUSIONS: Among endoscopists-in-training, the use of CADe during colonoscopies was associated with increased overall ADR. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT04838951).

Endoscopic measurement of the size of gastrointestinal polyps using an electromagnetic tracking system and computer vision-based algorithm.

PURPOSE: Polyp size is an important factor that may influence diagnosis and clinical management decision, but estimation by visual inspection during endoscopy is often difficult and subject to error. The purpose of this study is to develop a quantitative approach that enables an accurate and objective measurement of polyp size and to study the feasibility of the method. METHODS: We attempted to estimate polyp size and location relative to the gastro-oesophageal junction by integrating data from an electromagnetic tracking sensor and endoscopic images. This method is based on estimation of the three-dimensional coordinates of the borders of the polyp by combining the endoscope camera position and the corresponding points along the polyp border in endoscopic images using a computer vision-based algorithm. We evaluated the proposed method using a simulated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy model. RESULTS: The difference between the mean of ten measurements of one artificial polyp and its actual size (10 mm in diameter) was 0.86 mm. Similarly, the difference between the mean of ten measurements of the polyp distance from the gastroesophageal junction and its actual distance (~ 22 cm) was 1.28 mm. Our results show that the changes in camera positions in which the images were taken and the quality of the polyp segmentation have the most impact on the accuracy of polyp size estimation. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated an innovative approach to endoscopic measurements using motion tracking technologies and computer vision and demonstrated its accuracy in determining the size and location of the polyp. The observed magnitude of error is clinically acceptable, and the measurements are available immediately after the images captured. To enhance accuracy, it is recommended to avoid identical images and instead utilise control wheels on the endoscope for capturing different views. Future work should further evaluate this innovative method during clinical endoscopic procedures.

Clinical and endoscopic characteristics and management of 220 cases with serrated polyps.

BACKGROUND: Serrated polyps are considered the precursor lesions of colorectal cancer through the serrated pathway. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate and discuss the clinical and endoscopic characteristics and management of serrated polyps. METHODS: The data of 220 cases with serrated polyps between September 2018 and November 2021 in Shenzhen People's Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Of all these cases, 32 were hyperplastic polyps, 36 were traditional serrated adenomas, 126 were sessile serrated lesions, 25 were SSLs with dysplasia, and one was an unclassified serrated adenoma. Although most patients were males aged ≥50 years and most serrated polyps were located in the distal colon and rectum with a size of 6-10 mm and the shape of type 0-Is, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05). Serrated polyps of ≤5 mm in size and type 0-IIa were mostly removed by cold biopsy forceps. Cold snare polypectomy was primarily used for those of 6-10 mm in size. Endoscopic mucosal resection was used for those of 6-20 mm, and endoscopic submucosal dissection was used for those of ≥20 mm (P < 0.05). All complications occurred in SSL patients with or without dysplasia (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and endoscopic characteristics were beneficial for distinguishing and diagnosing serrated polyps. In addition, management options were crucial to prevent recurrence and progression. However, the detection rate of serrated polyps was relatively low. Therefore, prospective multicenter studies with large samples are necessary to better assess colorectal serrated polyps.

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Control for Patients with Serrated Polyposis Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Despite advances in endoscopic treatment, patients with serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) occasionally require surgery due to numerous or unresectable polyps, recurrence, and treatment-related adverse events. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 43 patients with SPS undergoing diagnosis and treatment at Omori Red Cross Hospital from 2011 to 2022. Resection of all polyps ≥3 mm in size was planned during the clearing phase; endoscopic control was defined as complete, endoscopic polyp removal. During the surveillance phase, patients underwent annual colonoscopy and resection of newly detected polyps ≥3 mm in size. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (88%) achieved endoscopic control, two (5%) required surgery after endoscopic treatment because of colorectal cancer (CRC), and three (7%) have not yet achieved endoscopic control and are planning treatment. Endoscopic control was achieved with a median of four colonoscopies at 8 months. Ten polyps (median value) were resected per patient during the clearing phase. Three polyps ≥50 mm in size, six located in the appendiceal orifice, and seven with severe fibrosis could be resected by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). All patients underwent treatment with a combination of cold snare polypectomy (CSP), endoscopic mucosal resection/hot polypectomy, and/or ESD. No case required surgery due to difficulty with endoscopic treatment. Delayed bleeding was observed in 2 cases (0.3%). Twenty-one patients underwent colonoscopies during the surveillance phase. Fifty-three polyps were resected using CSP; no CRC, sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia, or advanced adenoma were detected. CONCLUSION: SPS can be effectively, efficiently, and safely controlled with appropriate endoscopic management.