Impact of contrast dye submucosal pre-lifting on cold snare resection of small polyps: an Italian randomized observational trial
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: Small polyps are the most frequently detected lesions during colonoscopy, with an incomplete resection rate of 6.8% to 15.9%. This study aimed to improve small polyp cold snare resection radicality using submucosal contrast dye pre-lifting (PL+CSP). Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the standard cold snare polypectomy technique (PL-CSP) with PL+CSP to evaluate endoscopic and histological complete resection rates, adverse events, procedural times, and polyp retrieval failure rates. Results: In 143 patients consecutively enrolled, 186 small polyps were detected and randomly assigned following a 1:1 ratio to the PL-CSP (n=97, 51.6%) and PL+CSP (n=90, 48.4%) techniques. Endoscopic (p=0.97) and histologic (p=0.23) complete resection rates did not differ significantly even in univariate analysis. The intraprocedural bleeding rate was significantly higher in the PL+CSP group as confirmed by the univariate analysis (35.8% vs. 8.3%, p<0.001). The polyps retrieval failure rates were similar (p=0.83). Procedural time was significantly longer for PL+CSP (median time, 75 vs. 45 seconds; p<0.001), without impacting colonoscopy withdrawal time (p=0.215). Conclusions: PL+CSP of small polyps did not improve endoscopic and histological complete resection rates and polyp sample retrieval. PL+CSP had higher rates of intraprocedural bleeding and was “time-consuming”.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Small polyps are the most frequently detected lesions during colonoscopy, with an incomplete resection rate of 6.8% to 15.9%. This study aimed to improve small polyp cold snare resection radicality using submucosal contrast dye pre-lifting (PL+CSP). Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the standard cold snare polypectomy technique (PL-CSP) with PL+CSP to evaluate endoscopic and histological complete resection rates, adverse events, procedural times, and polyp retrieval failure rates. Results: In 143 patients consecutively enrolled, 186 small polyps were detected and randomly assigned following a 1:1 ratio to the PL-CSP (n=97, 51.6%) and PL+CSP (n=90, 48.4%) techniques. Endoscopic (p=0.97) and histologic (p=0.23) complete resection rates did not differ significantly even in univariate analysis. The intraprocedural bleeding rate was significantly higher in the PL+CSP group as confirmed by the univariate analysis (35.8% vs. 8.3%, p<0.001). The polyps retrieval failure rates were similar (p=0.83). Procedural time was significantly longer for PL+CSP (median time, 75 vs. 45 seconds; p<0.001), without impacting colonoscopy withdrawal time (p=0.215). Conclusions: PL+CSP of small polyps did not improve endoscopic and histological complete resection rates and polyp sample retrieval. PL+CSP had higher rates of intraprocedural bleeding and was “time-consuming”.