Cold- versus hot-snare endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal polyps: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials - 08/05/25

Abstract |
Background and Aims |
Interest in cold endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for colorectal polyps has been growing. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare cold and hot EMR for colorectal polyps.
Methods |
We reviewed several databases from inception to October 6, 2024. Outcomes of interest were recurrent or residual neoplasia, en-bloc resection, incomplete resection, perforation, and intraprocedural and delayed bleeding. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by means of a random-effects model.
Results |
Rate of recurrent or residual neoplasia was significantly higher in the cold EMR group: RR, 2.03 (95% CI, 1.19-3.48). Rates of delayed bleeding RR, 0.42 (95% CI, 0.21-0.86) and perforation RR, 0.13 (95% CI, 0.03-0.59) were significantly lower with cold EMR. We found no significant difference in other outcomes between groups.
Conclusions |
Cold EMR is associated with lower risk of delayed bleeding and perforation but higher risk of recurrent or residual neoplasia compared with hot EMR.
Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.Abbreviations : CSP, EMR, HSP, RCT, SSL, STSC, USMSTF
Mappa
| DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION: The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work. |
Vol 101 - N° 6
P. 1239 - giugno 2025 Ritorno al numeroBenvenuto 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 ?
