Colonoscopic snare polypectomy: analysis of 1485 resections comparing two types of current

doi:10.1016/S0016-5107(92)70479-9

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Volume 38, Issue 4, July 1992, Pages 472-475

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(92)70479-9 Get rights and content

The complications related to 1485 colonic snare polypectomies were analyzed according to the type of current which was used for resection. From January 1982 to August 1986 (period 1), blended current was used in 758 snare polypectomies, while continuous coagulation current was applied in 727 polypectomies from September 1986 to October 1989 (period 2). The incidence of complications observed in the entire series was low, consisting of 0.26% perforations and 0.9% major hemorrhages. There were no deaths in this series. Twelve of 14 hemorrhages occurred after resection of polyps larger than 1 cm. Although the incidence of complications was not statistically different in the two groups, there was a significant difference in the timing of hemorrhages. All of the major hemorrhages were immediate (eight) when the blended current was used, but delayed (six; from 2 to 8 days after polyp resection), when pure coagulation current was applied.

References (12)

A. Ghazi et al.
Complications of colonoscopy and polypectomy
Surg Clin North Am
(1982)
D.A. Gilbert et al.
The national A/S/G/E colonoscopy survey-complications of colonoscopy
Gastrointest Endosc
(1984)
P. Fruhmorgen
Therapeutic colonoscopy
F.A. Macrae et al.
Towards safer colonoscopy: a report on the complications of 5,000 diagnostic or therapeutic colonoscopies
Gut
(1983)
J.D. Waye
Techniques of polypectomy: hot biopsy forceps and snare polypectomy
Am J Gastroenterol
(1987)
W.A. Webb et al.
Experience with 1, 000 colonoscopic polypectomies
Ann Surg
(1985)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (177)

Updates on the Prevention and Management of Post-Polypectomy Bleeding in the Colon
2024, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America
EMR and ESD: Indications, techniques and results
2022, Surgical Oncology
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are two well-known endoscopic resection procedures used for advance gastrointestinal lesions. As compared to standard polypectomy techniques, EMR and ESD provide wider and deeper resection margins and allow en bloc removal of lesions for more detailed pathology with curative intent for early neoplastic gastrointestinal lesions. Both procedures have their advantages and disadvantages which will be discussed in detail in this review article. Recently there have been advancements in the techniques of EMR and ESD with addition in new equipment. We will also discuss current guidelines recommending use of EMR and/or ESD in various clinical scenarios.
Polypectomy Using Blended vs Forced Currents: Blue or Yellow? That Is the Question!
2020, Gastroenterology
Effects of Blended (Yellow) vs Forced Coagulation (Blue) Currents on Adverse Events, Complete Resection, or Polyp Recurrence After Polypectomy in a Large Randomized Trial
2020, Gastroenterology
There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence.
Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis.
Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006).
In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference. Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01936948.
Use of electrosurgical units in the endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal tumors
2019, Gastroenterologia y Hepatologia
Electrosurgical units (ESUs) are indispensable devices in our endoscopy units. However, many endoscopists are not well-trained on their use and their physical bases are usually not properly studied or understood. In addition, comparative data concerning the settings that may be applied in different circumstances are scarce in the medical literature. Given that it is important to be aware of their strengths and risks, we conducted a review of the available information and research on this topic.
Las unidades electroquirúrgicas (UES) son dispositivos indispensables en nuestras unidades de endoscopia. Sin embargo, muchos endoscopistas no están bien entrenados en su uso y sus bases físicas generalmente no son estudiadas o comprendidas adecuadamente. Además, los datos comparativos sobre los ajustes que pueden aplicarse en diferentes circunstancias son escasos en la literatura médica. Dado que es importante conocer sus fortalezas y riesgos, realizamos una revisión de la información existente y la investigación sobre este tema.
Cold snare endoscopic resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps larger than 10 mm: a systematic review and pooled-analysis
2019, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Hot snare polypectomy and EMR are the standard of care in resecting colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. To avoid the risk of electrocautery-induced damage, there is recent evidence about using cold snare polypectomy and cold EMR for such lesions. The aim of this pooled analysis is to report outcomes of cold snare resection for polyps ≥10 mm.
PubMed/Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2018 to identify studies that performed cold snare resection for colorectal polyps ≥10 mm. Primary outcomes were adverse events (bleeding, perforation, and postpolypectomy abdominal pain), and secondary outcomes were the rates of complete resection, overall residual polyp rates, and rates for adenomas versus sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). Subgroup analysis was performed focusing on lesion size, location, and resection technique.
Eight studies were included in the final analysis that included 522 colorectal polyps with a mean polyp size of 17.5 mm (range, 10-60). The overall adverse event rate was 1.1% (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.2%-2.0%; I² = 0%). Intra- and postprocedural bleeding rates were .7% (95% CI, 0%-1.4%) and .5% (95% CI, .1%-1.2%), respectively, with abdominal pain rate being .6% (95% CI, .1%-1.3%). Polyps ≥20 mm had a higher intraprocedural bleeding rate of 1.3% (95% CI, .7%-3.3%) and abdominal pain rate of 1.2% (95% CI, .7%-3.0%) but no delayed bleedings. No perforations were reported. The complete resection rate was 99.3% (95% CI, 98.6%-100%). Overall pooled residual rates of polyps of any histology, adenomas, and SSPs were 4.1% (95% CI, .2%-8.4%), 11.1% (95% CI, 4.1%-18.1%), and 1.0% (95% CI, .4%-2.4%), respectively, during a follow-up period ranging from 154 to 258 days.
The results of this systematic review and pooled analysis were excellent with cold snare resection of colorectal polyps >10 mm in terms of postpolypectomy bleeding, complete resection, and residual polyp rates. Randomized controlled trials comparing cold snare resection with hot snare resections of polyps ≥10 mm are required for further investigation.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Colonoscopic snare polypectomy: analysis of 1485 resections comparing two types of current

Surg Clin North Am

The national A/S/G/E colonoscopy survey-complications of colonoscopy

Gastrointest Endosc

Therapeutic colonoscopy

Towards safer colonoscopy: a report on the complications of 5,000 diagnostic or therapeutic colonoscopies

Gut

Techniques of polypectomy: hot biopsy forceps and snare polypectomy

Am J Gastroenterol

Experience with 1, 000 colonoscopic polypectomies

Ann Surg