Abbonarsi

A prospective randomized comparative study of cold forceps polypectomy by using narrow-band imaging endoscopy versus cold snare polypectomy in patients with diminutive colorectal polyps - 31/05/16

Doi : 10.1016/j.gie.2015.08.053 
Soo-kyung Park, MD, PhD 1, Bong Min Ko, MD 2, , Jae Pil Han, MD, PhD 2, Su Jin Hong, MD, PhD 2, Moon Sung Lee, MD, PhD 2
1 Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea 
2 Digestive Disease Center and Research Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University School of Medicine, Bucheon, Republic of Korea 

Reprint requests: Bong Min Ko, MD, Digestive Disease Center and Research Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University School of Medicine, 170 Jomaru-ro, Wonmi-gu, Bucheon, Gyenggi-do 420-767, Republic of Korea.Digestive Disease Center and Research InstituteDepartment of Internal MedicineSoonchunhyang University School of Medicine170 Jomaru-ro, Wonmi-guBucheonGyenggi-do 420-767Republic of Korea

Abstract

Background and Aims

A previous study reported that cold snare polypectomy (CSP) was superior to cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) for the removal of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs) (≤5 mm) when the techniques were assessed for completeness of resection. However, completeness is expected to be greater with CFP when strict investigation of the remnant polyp is performed. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of CFP with narrow-band imaging (NBI) evaluation of polypectomy sites for removal of DCPs, compared with CSP.

Methods

This was a randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial at a tertiary-care referral hospital. Of the 380 patients screened, 146 patients with 231 DCPs were enrolled. CFP was used to resect DCPs until no remnant polyp was visible by NBI endoscopy. The primary noninferiority endpoint was histologic eradication of polyps, with a noninferiority margin of -10%.

Results

A size of >3 mm was seen in 129 polyps (55.8%). The overall rates of histologic eradication were 90.5% in the CFP group and 93.0% in the CSP group (difference, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.67 to 4.62). However, when confined to the polyps >3 mm, the histologic eradication rate was 86.8% and 93.4% (95% CI, -17.2 to 3.6), respectively. Polyp size, histology, location, and time taken for polypectomy did not differ between the groups. The failure rate of tissue retrieval was higher in the CSP than in the CFP group (7.8% vs 0.0%, respectively; P =.001).

Conclusions

In this study, >90% of all DCPs were completely resected by using CFP with NBI evaluation of polypectomy sites, showing noninferiority compared with CSP. However, in polyps measuring >3 mm, CFP failed to show noninferiority versus CSP. CFP appears to be the proper method for resection of DCPs 1 to 3 mm in size if no remnant polyp is visible by NBI endoscopy, but CFP is likely to be insufficient for larger polyps. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02201147.)

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Abbreviations : CFP, CSP, DCP, NBI


Mappa


 DISCLOSURE: This work was supported, in part, by the SoonChunHyang University Research Fund. All authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.
 If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr Ko at kopa9445@gmail.com.
 See CME section; p. 637.


© 2016  American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 83 - N° 3

P. 527 - marzo 2016 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Reaching a milestone in continuous assessment of quality colonoscopy skills: adding an ace to our assessment toolbox
  • Thomas J. Savides
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Quality indicators for pediatric colonoscopy: results from a multicenter consortium
  • Kalpesh Thakkar, Jennifer L. Holub, Mark A. Gilger, Mitchell D. Shub, Mark McOmber, Marc Tsou, Douglas S. Fishman

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.