Comparison between endoscopic mucosal resection and hot snare resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomized trial

Background and study aims: It is unclear whether endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or hot snare resection is better for resecting large nonpedunculated polyps. The aim of this study was to determine a cutoff size of nonpedunculated neoplastic colorectal polyps at which the risk of incomplete resection differed between EMR and hot snare resection.

Patients and methods: Patients with nonpedunculated neoplastic polyps (10 – 25 mm in diameter) were randomly assigned to undergo endoscopic resection using EMR (52 patients with 63 polyps) or hot snare resection (52 patients with 62 polyps). EMR included submucosal injection of saline before resection. The primary outcome measure was the proportion with complete polyp resection determined by histopathology. The secondary outcome was total procedure time.

Results: Patient characteristics were similar between groups. EMR achieved complete resection more frequently than hot snare resection (89 % vs. 73 %; P = 0.02), particularly for polyps ≥ 20 mm (75 % [9 /12] vs. 18 % [2 /11]; P = 0.006). A complete resection rate of > 90 % was achieved for polyps of size < 19 mm with EMR, and for polyps of size ≤ 14 mm with hot snare resection. In multivariate analysis, incomplete resection was associated with hot snare resection (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95 % confidence interval (95 %CI) 1.0 – 8.3; P = 0.04) and polyp size ≥ 15 mm (OR 4.0, 95 %CI 1.3 – 14; P = 0.01). Total procedure time was shorter with hot snare resection than with EMR (mean 14.8 min vs. 17.2 min; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: EMR and hot snare resection appear to achieve similar complete resection rates for polyps up to 14 mm; however, EMR may be superior for larger polyps, particularly for those ≥ 20 mm.

Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT 01950117

• References

• 1 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 2 Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R. Italian multicentre study group et al. The Italian Multicentre Study Group: Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut 2001; 48: 812-815
• 3 Fyock CJ, Draganov PV. Colonoscopic polypectomy and associated techniques. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 3630-3637
• 4 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
• 5 Binmoeller KF, Bohnacker S, Seifert H et al. Endoscopic snare excision of “giant” colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 43: 183-188
• 6 Conio M, Repici A, Demarquay JF et al. EMR of large sessile colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 234-241
• 7 Woodward TA, Heckman MG, Cleveland P et al. Predictors of complete endoscopic mucosal resection of flat and depressed gastrointestinal neoplasia of the colon. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 650-654
• 8 Belderbos TD, van Oijen MG, Moons LM et al. The “golden retriever” study: improving polyp retrieval rates by providing education and competitive feedback. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 596-601 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.07.018. (Epub 2015 Aug 29)
• 9 Hurlstone DP, Sanders DS, Cross SS et al. Colonoscopic resection of lateral spreading tumors: a prospective analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection. Gut 2004; 53: 1334-1339
• 10 Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y, Kajiyama M et al. Benefits and limitations of cap-fitted colonoscopy in screening colonoscopy. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 534-539
• 11 Horiuchi A, Nakayama Y, Fujii H et al. Psychomotor recovery and blood propofol level in colonoscopy when using propofol sedation. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 506-512
• 12 Rembacken B, Hassan C, Riemann JF et al. Quality in screening colonoscopy: position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Endoscopy 2012; 44: 957-968
• 13 Liu S, Ho SB, Krinsky ML. Quality of polyp resection during colonoscopy: are we achieving polyp clearance?. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 1786-1791
• 14 Lee CK, Shim JJ, 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
• 15 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
• 16 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
• 17 Jovanovic I, Caro C, Neumann H et al. The submucosal cushion does not improve the histologic evaluation of adenomatous colon polyps resected by snare polypectomy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 910-913
• 18 Liaquat H, Rohn E, Rex DK. Prophylactic clip closure reduced the risk of delayed postpolypectomy hemorrhage: experience in 277 clipped large sessile or flat colorectal lesions and 247 control lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 401-407
• 19 Horiuchi A, Tanaka N. Clinical review: Improving quality measures in colonoscopy and its therapeutic intervention. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 13027-13034
• 20 Jung YS, Park JH, Kim HJ et al. Complete biopsy resection of diminutive polyps. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 1024-1029
• 21 Hewett DG. Colonoscopic polypectomy: current techniques and controversies. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2013; 42: 443-458