Download PDF
Endoscopy 2024; 56(07): 503-511
DOI: 10.1055/a-2275-5349
Systematic review

Cold endoscopic mucosal resection versus cold snare polypectomy for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Paula Arruda do Espirito Santo 
1   Diagnostic Imaging and Specialized Diagnosis Unit, University Hospital of Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil
,
Gilmara Coelho Meine 
2   Department of Internal Medicine (Division of Gastroenterology), FEEVALE University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN125099)
,
Stefano Baraldo 
3   Department of Endoscopy, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN67766)
,
Eduardo Cerchi Barbosa 
4   Department of Internal Medicine, Evangelical University of Goias, Anápolis, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints


Referred to by:

Will submucosal injection for colonic polyps get left out in the cold?Endoscopy 2024; 56(07): 512-513
DOI: 10.1055/a-2305-6448

Referred to by:

Author commentary on Paula Arruda do Espirito Santo et al.Endoscopy 2024; 56(07): v10-v10
DOI: 10.1055/a-2291-0757

Abstract

Background Cold resection of colorectal lesions is widely performed because of its safety and effectiveness; however, it remains uncertain whether adding submucosal injection could improve the efficacy and safety. We aimed to compare cold endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) versus cold snare polypectomy (CSP) for colorectal lesions.

Methods We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The primary outcome was complete resection. Secondary outcomes were procedure time, en bloc resection, and adverse events (AEs). Prespecified subgroup analyses based on the size and morphology of the polyps were performed. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference, with corresponding 95%CIs, for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I 2 statistics.

Results 7 RCTs were included, comprising 1556 patients, with 2287 polyps analyzed. C-EMR and CSP had similar risk ratios for complete resection (RR 1.02, 95%CI 0.98–1.07), en bloc resection (RR 1.08, 95%CI 0.82–1.41), and AEs (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.41–1.32). C-EMR had a longer procedure time (mean difference 42.1 seconds, 95%CI 14.5–69.7 seconds). In stratified subgroup analyses, the risk was not statistically different between C-EMR and CSP for complete resection in polyps<10 mm or ≥10 mm, or for complete resection, en bloc resection, and AEs in the two groups among nonpedunculated polyps.

Conclusions The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that C-EMR has similar efficacy and safety to CSP, but significantly increases the procedure time.

PROSPERO: CRD42023439605.

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 13 September 2023

Accepted after revision: 12 February 2024

Article published online:
19 March 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. NEJM 2012; 366: 687-696
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. NEJM 1993; 329: 1977-1981
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Pan J, Xin L, Ma YF. et al. colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in patients with non-malignant findings: a meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 355-365
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Katagiri A, Suzuki N, Nakatani S. et al. Submucosal injection using epinephrine-added saline in cold snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps shortens time required for resection: a randomized controlled study. Cureus 2023; 15: e39164
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Mou Y, Ye L, Qin X. et al. Impact of submucosal saline injection during cold snare polypectomy for colorectal polyps sized 3–9 mm: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2023; 118: 1848-1854
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kim MJ, Na SY, Kim JS. et al. Cold snare polypectomy versus cold endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2023; 37: 3789-3795
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Ferlitsch M, Moss A, Hassan C. et al. Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 270-297
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Kaltenbach T, Anderson JC, Burke CA. et al. Endoscopic removal of colorectal lesions: Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 486-519
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Gaglia A, Sarkar S. Evaluation and long-term outcomes of the different modalities used in colonic endoscopic mucosal resection. Ann Gastroenterol 2017; 30: 145-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Muniraj T, Sahakian A, Ciarleglio MM. et al. Cold snare polypectomy for large sessile colonic polyps: a single-center experience. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2015; 2015: 175959
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Tutticci NJ, Hewett DG. Cold EMR of large sessile serrated polyps at colonoscopy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 837-842
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Piraka C, Saeed A, Waljee AK. et al. Cold snare polypectomy for non-pedunculated colon polyps greater than 1 cm. Endosc Int Open 2017; 5: E184-E189
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Rameshshanker R, Tsiamoulos Z, Latchford A. et al. Resection of large sessile serrated polyps by cold piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection: Serrated Cold Piecemeal Endoscopic mucosal resection (SCOPE). Endoscopy 2018; 50: E165-E167
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Yabuuchi Y, Imai K, Hotta K. et al. Efficacy and safety of cold-snare endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal adenomas 10 to 14 mm in size: a prospective observational study. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 1239-1246
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Mangira D, Cameron K, Simons K. et al. Cold snare piecemeal EMR of large sessile colonic polyps ≥20 mm (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 1343-1352
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 McWhinney CD, Vemulapalli KC, El Rahyel A. et al. Adverse events and residual lesion rate after cold endoscopic mucosal resection of serrated lesions ≥10 mm. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 654-659
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Tziatzios G, Gkolfakis P, Papadopoulos V. et al. Modified endoscopic mucosal resection techniques for treating precancerous colorectal lesions. Ann Gastroenterol 2021; 34: 757-769
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Liang Z, Wei Y, Zhang S. et al. The efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy with submucosal injection for the removal of polyps less than 20 mm in size: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 38: 1892-1899
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Abdallah M, Ahmed K, Abbas D. et al. Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection for colon polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 1083-1094
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Wei MT, Louie CY, Chen Y. et al. Randomized controlled trial investigating use of submucosal injection of EverLiftTM in rates of complete resection of non-pedunculated 4–9 mm polyps. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022; 37: 1273-1279
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Li D, Wang W, Xie J. et al. Efficacy and safety of three different endoscopic methods in treatment of 6–20 mm colorectal polyps. Scand J Gastroenterol 2020; 55: 362-370
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Shimodate Y, Itakura J, Takayama H. et al. Impact of submucosal saline solution injection for cold snare polypectomy of small colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 715-722.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Rex D, Anderson J, Pohl H. et al. Cold versus hot snare resection with or without submucosal injection of 6- to 15-mm colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 330-338
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ. et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019; 366: l4898
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J. et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.4 (updated August 2023). Cochrane. 2023 Accessed February 19, 2024 at: http://handbook.cochrane.org
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372: n71
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Luo D, Wan X, Liu J. et al. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res 2018; 27: 1785-1805
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Wan X, Wang W, Liu J. et al. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14: 135
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 van Hattem WA, Shahidi N, Vosko S. et al. Piecemeal cold snare polypectomy versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile serrated lesions: a retrospective comparison across two successive periods. Gut 2021; 70: 1691-1697
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Thoguluva Chandrasekar V, Spadaccini M, Aziz M. et al. Cold snare endoscopic resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps larger than 10 mm: a systematic review and pooled-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 929-936.e3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Motchum L, Djinbachian R, Rahme E. et al. Incomplete resection rates of 4- to 20-mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps when using wide-field cold snare resection with routine submucosal injection. Endosc Int Open 2023; 11: E480-E489
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Thoguluva Chandrasekar V, Aziz M, Patel HK. et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of sessile serrated polyps 10 mm or larger: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18: 2448-2455.e3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Papastergiou V, Paraskeva KD, Fragaki M. et al. Cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 6–10 mm: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 403-411
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Tziatzios G, Papaefthymiou A, Facciorusso A. et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of resection techniques for treating 6 to 20mm, nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Dig Liver Dis 2023; 55: 856-864
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Holme Ø. Are we ready for the cold snare revolution?. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 938-939
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar