A randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy versus a suction pseudopolyp technique

Background: Cold snare techniques are widely used for removal of diminutive and small colorectal polyps. The influence of resection technique on the effectiveness of polypectomy is unknown. We therefore compared standard cold snare polypectomy with a newly described suction pseudopolyp technique, for completeness of excision and for complications.

Patients and methods: In this single-center study, 112 patients were randomized to cold snare polypectomy or the suction pseudopolyp technique. Primary outcome was endoscopic completeness of excision. Consensus regarding the endoscopic assessment of completeness of excision was standardized and aided by chromoendoscopy. Secondary outcomes included: completeness of histological excision, polyp “fly away” and retrieval rates, early bleeding (48 hours), delayed bleeding (2 weeks), and perforation.

Results: 148 polyps were removed, with size range 3 – 7 mm, 60 % in the left colon, and 90 % being sessile. Regarding completeness of excision (with uncertain findings omitted): endoscopically, this was higher with the suction pseudopolyp technique compared with cold snare polypectomy but not statistically significantly so (73/74 [98.6 %] vs. 63/68 [92.6 %]; P = 0.08). A trend towards a higher complete histological excision rate with the suction pseudopolyp technique was also not statistically significant (45/59 [76.3 %] vs. 37/58 [63.8 %]; P = 0.14). Polyp retrieval rate was not significantly different (suction 68/76 [89.5 %] vs. cold snare 64/72 [88.9 %]; P = 0.91). No perforation or bleeding requiring hemostasis occurred in either group. 

Conclusion: In this study both polypectomy techniques were found to be safe and highly effective, but further large multicenter trials are required.

Clinical trial registration at www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02208401

• References

• 1 Repici A, Hassan C, Vitetta E et al. Safety of cold polypectomy for < 10 mm polyps at colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 27-31
• 2 Tsai FC, Strum WB. Prevalence of advanced adenomas in small and diminutive colon polyps using direct measurement of size. Dig Dis Sci 2011; 56: 2384-2388
• 3 Ellis K, Schiele M, Marquis S et al. Efficacy of hot biopsy forceps, cold micro-snare and micro-snare with cautery techniques in the removal of diminutive colonic polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 1997; 45: 329-329
• 4 Humphris JL, Tippett J, Kwok A et al. Cold snare polypectomy for diminutive polyps: an assessment of the risk of incomplete removal of small adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: AB207
• 5 Lee CK, Shim J-J, Jang JY. Cold snare polypectomy vs. cold forceps polypectomy using double-biopsy technique for removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 1593-1600
• 6 Hyun-Soo K, Hye WonH, Hong JunP et al. Cold snare versus hot snare polypectomy for the complete resection of 5 – 9 mm sized colorectal polyps; A randomised controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: AB401-AB402
• 7 Pattullo V, Bourke MJ, Tran KL et al. The suction pseudopolyp technique: a novel method for the removal of small flat nonpolypoid lesions of the colon and rectum. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 1032-1037
• 8 Riley SA. Colonoscopic polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: a practical guide. British Society of Gastroenterology. Available at: http://www.bsg.org.uk/images/stories/docs/sections/endo/polypectomy_08.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2014 2008
• 9 Hewett DG, Rex DK. Colonoscopy and diminutive polyps: hot or cold biopsy or snare? Do I send to pathology? . Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 102-105
• 10 Hewett DG. Colonoscopic polypectomy: current techniques and controversies. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2013; 42: 443-458
• 11 NHS BCS Programme Pathology Group. Reporting lesions in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Guidelines from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Pathology Group. NHS BCSP publication no. 1. Sheffield, UK: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes; 2007
• 12 Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971; 76: 371-382
• 13 Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991
• 14 Farrar WD, Sawhney MS, Nelson DB et al. Colorectal cancers found after a complete colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 1259-1264
• 15 Leung K, Pinsky P, Laiyemo AO et al. Ongoing colorectal cancer risk despite surveillance colonoscopy: the Polyp Prevention Trial Continued Follow-up Study. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 111-117
• 16 Pabby A, Schoen RE, Weissfeld JL et al. Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary Polyp Prevention Trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 385-391
• 17 Efthymiou M, Taylor ACF, Desmond PV et al. Biopsy forceps is inadequate for the resection of diminutive polyps. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 312-316
• 18 Draganov PV, Chang MN, Alkhasawneh A et al. Randomized, controlled trial of standard, large-capacity versus jumbo biopsy forceps for polypectomy of small, sessile, colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 118-126
• 19 Vanagunas A, Jacob P, Vakil N. Adequacy of “hot biopsy” for the treatment of diminutive polyps: a prospective randomized trial. Am J Gastroenterol 1989; 84: 383-385
• 20 Gilbert DA, DiMarino AJ, Jensen DM et al. Status evaluation: hot biopsy forceps. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Technology Assessment Committee. Gastrointest Endosc 1992; 38: 753-756
• 21 Monkemuller KE, Fry LC, Jones BH et al. Histological quality of polyps resected using the cold versus hot biopsy technique. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 432-436
• 22 Ichise Y, Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y et al. Prospective randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy and conventional polypectomy for small colorectal polyps. Digestion 2011; 84: 78-81
• 23 Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y, Kajiyama M et al. Removal of small colorectal polyps in anticoagulated patients: a prospective randomized comparison of cold snare and conventional polypectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 417-423
• 24 Paspatis GA, Tribonias G, Konstantinidis K et al. A prospective randomized comparison of cold vs hot snare polypectomy in the occurrence of postpolypectomy bleeding in small colonic polyps. Colorectal Dis 2011; 13: 345-348
• 25 Bourke MJ. Making every colonoscopy count: Ensuring quality in endoscopy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 24: S43-S50
• 26 Komeda Y, Suzuki N, Sarah M et al. Factors associated with failed polyp retrieval at screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 395-400
• 27 Rex DK, Alikhan M, Cummings O et al. Accuracy of pathologic interpretation of colorectal polyps by general pathologists in community practice. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 50: 468-474
• 28 Pohl H, Srivastava A, Bensen SP et al. Incomplete polyp resection during colonoscopy – results of the complete adenoma resection (CARE) Study. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 74-80
• 29 Konishi K, Kaneko K, Kurahashi T et al. A comparison of magnifying and nonmagnifying colonoscopy for diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 48-53
• 30 Liu SL, Ho SB, Krinsky ML. Quality of polyp resection during colonoscopy: are we achieving polyp clearance?. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 1786-179