Endoscopic mucosal resection of 161 cases of large sessile or flat colorectal polyps

Objective. Large sessile or flat colorectal polyps, which are traditionally treated surgically, may be amenable to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), often using a piecemeal method. Appropriate selection of lesions and a careful technique may enhance the efficacy of EMR for polyps ≥20 mm in diameter without compromising safety. The aim of this study was to identify the factors that may be predictive of the risk of polyp recurrence. Material and methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted on the outcome of 161 polyps ≥20 mm in diameter, treated by piecemeal EMR at a single centre using the “lift and cut” technique. All records were reviewed for polyp size, site, morphology and histology. Polypectomy technique, patient follow-up, polyp recurrence and surgical interventions were also recorded. Results. Over an 8-year period, 161 colonic polyps measuring ≥20 mm were removed by EMR. Follow-up data were available for 149 cases (93%) with a mean polyp diameter of 32.5 mm; the total success rate of endoscopic polyp removal was 95.4%. The number of cases requiring 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 attempts at EMR was 89 (60%), 36 (24%), 14 (9%), 2 (1.3%) and 1 (0.7%), respectively. Recurrence was significantly related to polyp size (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant relationship between site and recurrence. Seven patients (4.6%) underwent surgical intervention after EMR because of failed clearance. There were no post-EMR perforations and significant bleeding was reported in only two patients (1.7%). Conclusions. With careful attention to technique, piecemeal EMR is a safe option for the resection of most sessile and flat colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size. A stricter follow-up may be required for larger lesions because of a higher risk of recurrence.     

EMR of large sessile colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND: EMR optimizes histopathologic assessment of resected lesions. This study evaluated the outcome of EMR of large sessile colorectal polyps in terms of complications and recurrence. METHODS: An uncontrolled prospective study was conducted of a cohort of 136 patients with sessile colorectal polyps referred for EMR. After submucosal injection, EMR was performed piecemeal by either snare polypectomy alone or with cap aspiration. RESULTS: In 136 patients, a total of 139 sessile polyps were resected, 86 of which were in the right colon. Median polyps diameter was 20 mm in the right colon and 30 mm in the other colonic segments. Intraprocedure bleeding occurred after 15 polypectomies (10.8%) and was controlled endoscopically in all cases; there was no delayed bleeding. Post-polypectomy syndrome occurred in 5 patients (3.7%). There was no perforation. Invasive carcinoma was found in 17 sessile colorectal polyps, and surgery was performed in 10 of 17 cases. Follow-up colonoscopy in 93 patients without invasive carcinoma (96 polyps), over a median of 12.3 months, disclosed local recurrence of 21 adenomatous polyps (21.9%). Colonoscopic follow-up in 5 of the 7 patients, who had sessile colorectal polyps with invasive carcinoma and did not undergo surgery, disclosed no local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: EMR, including EMR with cap aspiration, is effective and safe for removal of sessile colorectal polyps throughout the colon.     

Polyp Recurrence After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Sessile and Flat Colonic Adenomas

Background  

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is used for treatment of sessile and flat colonic adenomas. There is limited data comparing polyp recurrence between piecemeal and en-bloc resections.     

内镜黏膜切除术治疗大肠广基大息肉

目的探讨内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)对肠道广基大息肉样病变的治疗价值。方法采用结肠镜下大肠黏膜切除术治疗135例共157个结直肠广基大息肉。病灶黏膜下注射肾上腺素生理盐水后,一次圈套整块切除或分次圈套切除病变,回收全部标本送病理检查,术后结肠镜随访。结果全部息肉EMR一次切除,除3个位于直肠黏膜下的病灶小于1 cm外,其余均大于1.5 cm,最大的13 cm×12 cm,无手术并发症。术后病理:腺瘤123个,其中有异型增生80个;黏膜内癌11个;增生性息肉20个;直肠类癌3个。随访中,有2例大于7 cm的直肠腺瘤分别于术后1个月及3个月复查时复发,均给予热活检钳完整钳除,病理分别为增生性息肉和绒毛状腺瘤,再复查6-12个月无复发。结论EMR是治疗大肠癌前病变及黏膜内癌安全、有效的方法。     

Large sessile colonic adenomas: use of argon plasma coagulator to supplement piecemeal snare polypectomy

BACKGROUND: Residual adenoma is frequently found at the site of endoscopically resected large sessile adenomas on follow-up examination. We evaluated the efficacy of a thermal energy source, the argon plasma coagulator, to destroy visible residual adenoma after piecemeal resection of sessile polyps. METHODS: Seventy-seven piecemeal polypectomies with or without the use of argon plasma coagulator were analyzed retrospectively. All polyps were sessile, 20 mm or greater in size. The results from three groups of patients were compared. The study group was composed of patients who had visible residual adenoma after piecemeal polypectomy and had the base of the polypectomy site treated with the argon plasma coagulator. The first comparison group consisted of patients who underwent standard piecemeal polypectomy in whom the colonoscopist thought that all adenomatous tissue was removed and no further treatment was necessary. The second comparison group included patients in whom visible residual adenoma was left at the base after piecemeal resection of large adenomas. Follow-up colonoscopy was performed approximately 6 months after the initial procedure to check for recurrent/residual adenomatous tissue. RESULTS: The argon plasma coagulator was used after 30 piecemeal polypectomies in an attempt to eradicate visible residual adenomatous tissue; at follow-up, 50% of these cases had complete eradication of adenoma. The group in whom all visible tumor was removed by piecemeal polypectomy alone had an adenoma eradication rate of 54% on follow-up colonoscopy. In the patients in whom visible residual adenoma was left at the site the recurrence rate was 100% on the follow-up examination. Bleeding necessitating endoscopic therapy occurred once (3.3%) in the argon plasma coagulator group; there were four (12.5%) bleeding episodes and one (3.1%) confined retroperitoneal perforation in the complete piecemeal polypectomy group and no complications in the group in which polypectomy was incomplete. CONCLUSIONS: Argon plasma coagulator ablation of residual adenomatous tissue at the polypectomy base is safe and useful. It helps to complete the eradication of large sessile polyps when there is visible evidence of residual polyp.     

The difference in malignancy between pedunculated and sessile polypoid lesions of the gallbladder

Surgically resected polypoid lesions of the gallbladder from 97 patients were evaluated to determine both the shape (pedunculated or sessile) and diameter of the polypoid lesions, in association with malignancy. At the time of analysis, the largest polypoid lesion examined was when two or more lesions were detected in one patient because they were histologically the same. Carcinoma was noted in 9 (13%) of the 67 pedunculated lesions and in 10 (33%) of the 30 sessile lesions. The sessile carcinoma was 14 +/- 4 mm (8-20 mm) in maximum diameter, which was not significantly larger than the 8 +/- 4 mm of the benign polyps, but significantly smaller than the 22 +/- 8 mm (14-35 mm) of pedunculated carcinomas (p less than 0.05). Cancer invasion extended beyond the muscular layer in eight cases (80%) of sessile carcinoma, and two of them were 10 mm or less in diameter. On the other hand, cancer invasion was beyond the muscular layer in two cases (22%) of pedunculated carcinoma (p less than 0.05), and these two were 30 mm or more in diameter. Likewise, sessile carcinoma was characterized by both a higher incidence of nodal involvement and poorer prognosis, compared with pedunculated carcinoma. These findings indicate that surgery should be undertaken when sessile polyps are detected by ultrasonography, even though the polyp may be less than 10 mm in diameter. On the other hand, with regard to the pedunculated type, malignancy should be suspected when the polyp is more than 10 mm in diameter.     

Treatment patterns and costs associated with sessile colorectal polyps

OBJECTIVES: Because of the paucity of existing literature on treatment and costs associated with sessile lesions, the objectives of this study were to perform a retrospective analysis on patients with sessile polyps to identify patient and polyp characteristics, to determine treatment patterns, and to estimate the cost of treating these patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of 280 patients who presented to a large teaching hospital between 1997 and 2000 with at least one sessile or broad-based pedunculated colorectal polyp of any size or histology, not including adenocarcinoma greater than stage T1. RESULTS: Mean polyp size was 1.3 cm, and two thirds of polyps were removed in a single procedure. The number of repeat procedures increased with polyp size (Kendall T-b = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.39-0.55). Patients with polyps > or = 2 cm were 5.88 times more likely than patients with smaller polyps to undergo a surgical procedure. Surgical procedures required 88.01 min longer than nonsurgical procedures (95% CI = 74.43-102.42). Mean total cost of treatment was $2,038 (range $153 to $14,838). Open resection ($6,165) was the most costly surgical procedure, and piecemeal polypectomy ($892) was the most costly nonsurgical therapeutic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: One third of polyps required more than one procedure. Surgical procedures accounted for the majority of resource use in this sample. Finally, patients with polyps > or = 2 cm incurred almost half the total costs while accounting for only 22% of the sample. The greatest economic gains could be made by improving efficiency of polyp removal for these patients.     

Endoscopic snare resection of large colonic polyps: how far can we go?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonoscopic polypectomy is preventing colorectal cancer. Videoendoscopy and new perendoscopic hemostasis techniques make endoscopic polypectomy of large colonic polyps an alternative to the surgical approach. This study examined whether complete snare resection of giant colonic polyps is feasible and safe and for determining how often surgery is necessary due to invasive cancer detected histologically after polypectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 59 consecutive patients with 68 colonic polyps larger 30 mm in diameter. Snare polypectomy was performed after an endoscopic ultrasound with a miniprobe found no sign of invasive, or, depending on the appearance of the polyp, a bleeding prophylaxis had been carried out. Acute procedural or delayed bleeding was treated endoscopically. RESULTS: Of the 68 polyps 26, mostly pedunculated were resected en bloc (38%) and histologically ensured as completely resected; 42 polyps had to be resected by piecemeal technique (62%). Piecemeal resection was performed significantly more often in sessile polyps (38/41, 93%) than in pedunculated polyps (4/27, 15%, P<0.01). Follow-up colonoscopy after 3 months showed remaining adenomatous tissue of piecemeal-resected polyps in 12 cases (28%), which were 12 resected sessile polyps (29%) and no case of resected pedunculated polyp. To achieve complete resection of sessile polyps a second procedure was necessary significantly more often than for resection of pedunculated polyps (12 cases in sessile polyps, 18% vs. no case in pedunculated polyps). Remaining adenomatous tissue was removed in all 12 cases during the first follow-up colonoscopy after 3 months, confirmed by a biopsy 6 months after the initial procedure. Overall coexisting malignancy was found in only 7 polyps (12%). Due to high-risk factors only one of them underwent secondary surgical procedure. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that endoscopic snare resection of giant colonic polyps is a safe procedure, and that secondary operative measures for managing coexisting malignancy are rarely necessary.     

内镜下黏膜切除术治疗Peutz-Jeghers巨大十二指肠息肉71例临床研究北大核心CSCD

目的评估内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗Peutz-Jeghers综合征(PJS)巨大十二指肠息肉的安全性及有效性。方法收集2013年2月至2020年8月在空军特色医学中心确诊为PJS十二指肠息肉并经EMR治疗的病例资料,统计EMR治疗PJS十二指肠巨大息肉的完整切除率、并发症发生率。比较巨大息肉组(直径≥3 cm)与普通息肉组(直径<3 cm)患者EMR手术完整切除率和并发症发生情况,并分析EMR治疗PJS十二指肠息肉手术并发症发生的影响因素。结果共71例患者纳入研究,男44例,女27例,中位年龄为26岁(5~58岁)。内镜下切除息肉最大中位直径为2.0 cm(0.6~13.0 cm),所有患者均成功实施EMR手术,63例患者EMR治疗PJS十二指肠息肉实现完整切除(63/71,88.7%),巨大息肉组EMR手术完整切除率低于普通息肉组(77.4%比97.5%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.023)。EMR手术相关并发症总发生率5.6%(4/71),1例患者同时存在术中创面渗血和术后胰腺炎。巨大息肉组与普通息肉组间并发症发生率(9.7%比2.5%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。内镜下EMR切除十二指肠息肉有无并发症发生在患者性别、年龄、有无PJS家族史、手术史、息肉数量、切除方式上的差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05),而息肉位于乳头部位者并发症发生率(50%,3/6)显著高于非乳头部位者(1.5%,1/65),差异有统计学意义(P=0.001)。结论EMR治疗PJS巨大十二指肠息肉总体安全有效的,可作为PJS十二指肠息肉的首选治疗方案。息肉部位是EMR手术相关并发症发生的重要影响因素。     

黏膜切除术治疗结直肠广基隆起性腺瘤性息肉98例临床研究

目的探讨内镜下黏膜切除术(endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR)治疗结直肠广基隆起性腺瘤性息肉患者的疗效。方法回顾性分析98例结直肠广基隆起性腺瘤性息肉(息肉直径0.6~2.0 cm)患者的临床资料并行EMR治疗。结果 98例均经电子结肠镜检查及术前病理诊断为腺瘤性息肉,均为广基隆起性病变,共120枚,行EMR,留取完整标本病理检查,创面均给予钛夹封闭。术后病理诊断为腺瘤性息肉113例,高级别瘤变4例,局部癌变3例,7例切缘均无癌细胞,未追加外科手术。1个月后复查见病变部位黏膜光滑,未见息肉及病变黏膜残留。高级别瘤变及局部癌变7例随访3年,未见肿瘤复发及它处转移。结论对于广基隆起性腺瘤性息肉行EMR较既往单纯的高频电灼或氩离子凝固术有助于发现早期癌,改善患者的预后。     

Efficacy, risk factors and complications of endoscopic polypectomy： Ten year experience at a single center

AIM： To examine the efficacy and complications of colonoscopic resection of colorectal polypoid lesions. METHODS： We retrospectively reviewed 1354 polypectomies performed on 1038 patients over a ten- year period. One hundred and sixty of these were performed for large polyps, those measuring ≥ 20 mm. Size, shape, location, histology, the technique of polypectomy used, complications, drugs assumption and associated intestinal or extra intestinal diseases were analyzed. For statistical analysis, the Pearson χ2 test, NPC test and a Binary Logistic Regression were used. RESULTS： The mean patient age was 65.9 ± 12.4 years, with 671 men and 367 women. The mean size of polyps removed was 9.45 ± 9.56 mm while the size of large polyps was 31.5 ± 10.8 mm. There were 388 pedunculated and 966 sessile polyps and the most common location was the sigmoid colon （41.3%）. The most frequent histology was tubular adenoma （55.9%） while for the large polyps was villous （92/160 -57.5%）. Coexistent malignancy was observed in 28 polyps （2.1%） and of these, 20 were large polyps. There were 17 procedural bleeding （1.3%） and one perforation. The statistical analysis showed that cancer is correlated to polyp size （P 〈 0.0001）; sessile shape （P 〈 0.0001） and bleeding are correlated to cardiac disease （P = 0.034）, tubular adenoma （P = 0.016） and polyp size.CONCLUSION： The endoscopic resection is a simple and safe procedure for removing colon rectal neoplastic lesions and should be considered the treatment of choice for large colorectal polyps. The polyp size is an important risk factor for malignancy and for bleeding.     

A sessile (diminutive) polyp within a sigmoid diverticulum—EMR or observe?

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a well-established technique for excision of colo-rectal polyps, which can be technically challenging when the polyp is inside a diverticulum, as colonic perforation may easily occur due to the lack of muscular coats. Here we report, to our knowledge, the first case of sessile (diminutive) polyp inside a diverticulum being successfully removed entirely by EMR.     

Retroflexion in the colon: a useful and safe technique in the evaluation and resection of sessile polyps during colonoscopy

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic polypectomy has become the standard management approach for colon polyps. Three factors can make endoscopic resection of colonic polyps difficult: size, configuration, and location. We describe the use of retroflexion in the colon as a useful and routine technique using a standard colonoscope for the resection of difficult sessile polyps. METHODS: Fifteen patients in whom the retroflexion technique was used for polyp removal were prospectively identified. Each polyp was visualized and resected using both a forward and retroflexed view. RESULTS: Nine women and six men were identified between the ages of 49 and 81 years. The 15 polyps were located in the cecum (3), ascending colon (3), hepatic flexure (3), splenic flexure (2), descending colon (2), and sigmoid colon (2). All the polyps were sessile and their largest diameter ranged from 20 mm to 50 mm. Retroflexion combined with forward viewing allowed for a better assessment of the size and extent of all the polyps compared with forward viewing alone. All polyps, except two, were completely resected during the first session, using both the prograde and retroflexion approaches. No complications from retroflexion of the colonoscope, including perforation or bleeding, occurred. CONCLUSION: Retroflexion complements the conventional prograde inspection of sessile polyps that are only partially visualized on prograde view alone. Retroflexion allows a complete assessment of the lesions' size and extent and aid in their complete removal.     

Endoscopic piecemeal resection with submucosal saline injection of large sessile colorectal polyps

BACKGROUND: Because endoscopic en bloc resection of large, sessile colorectal polyps is technically difficult, they are usually resected piecemeal. However, piecemeal resection makes it difficult to evaluate the completeness of the resection histopathologically. In this study the efficacy of endoscopic piecemeal resection of large, sessile colorectal polyps was investigated after follow-up greater than 1 year. METHODS: We removed 56 sessile colorectal polyps 2 cm or greater in diameter in 56 patients by using an endoscopic submucosal saline injection technique. Endoscopic examinations were repeated at 3, 6, and 12 months and longer after initial endoscopic resection. If no residual tumor was found endoscopically and histologically, the patient was considered to be "cured." RESULTS: Of the 56 polyps, 14 (25%) were resected en bloc, and 42 (75%) were resected piecemeal. Of the 42 patients treated with piecemeal resection, 23 (55%) required additional endoscopic or surgical interventions. In patients followed 1 year or longer after initial treatment, the cure rate by en bloc resection was 100% (14 of 14) and that by piecemeal resection was 83% (35 of 42). Arterial bleeding occurred in 4 patients (7%) during or after endoscopic resection. In 3 of them, bleeding was stopped by endoscopic clipping, but 1 patient required emergent laparotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic piecemeal resection after submucosal saline injection with an intensive follow-up program is a safe and effective treatment for large, sessile colorectal polyps.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenomas>20mm:Risk factors for recurrence

AIM: To evaluate risk factors for local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of colorectal adenomas 20 mm.METHODS: Retrospective data analysis of 216 endoscopic mucosal resections for colorectal adenomas 20 mm in 179 patients(40.3% female; median age 68 years; range 35-91 years). All patients had at least 1 follow-up endoscopy with a minimum control interval of 2 mo(mean follow-up 6 mo/2.0-43.4 mo). Possible factors associated with local recurrence were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Median size of the lesions was 30 mm(20-70 mm),69.0% were localized in the right-sided(cecum,ascending and transverse) colon. Most of the lesions(85.6%) showed a non-pedunculated morphology and the majority of resections was in piecemeal technique(78.7%). Histology showed carcinoma or high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia in 51/216(23.6%) lesions including 4 low risk carcinomas(pT1 a,L0,V0,R0- G1/G2). Histologically proven recurrence was observed in 33/216 patients(15.3%). Patient age65 years,polyp size30 mm,non-pedunculated morphology,localization in the right-sided colon,piecemeal resection and tubular-villous histology were found as associated factors in univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis,only localization in the rightsided colon(HR = 6.842/95%CI:1.540-30.394; P=0.011),tubular-villous histology(HR = 3.713/95%CI: 1.617-8.528;P=0.002) and polyp size30 mm(HR=2.563/95%CI:1.179-5.570; P=0.017) were significantly associated risk factors for adenoma recurrence. CONCLUSION: Meticulous endoscopic follow-up is warranted after endoscopic mucosal resection of adenomas localized in the right-sided colon larger than 30 mm,with tubular-villous histology.     

What can be the criteria of outpatient-based endoscopic resection for colon polyp?

AIM: To investigate whether out-patient based endo-scopic mucosal resection(EMR) for colon polyps ≤ 10 mm is safe.METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2012, a total of 3015 EMR cases conducted in 1320 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The factors contributing delayed hemorrhage were analyzed. We calculated the probability of delayed bleeding after stratifying conditions of specific risk factors.RESULTS: The size of the polyp(95%CI: 1.096-1.164, P 0.001) and patients with chronic renal failure(95%CI: 1.856-45.106, P = 0.007) were identified as independent risk factors for delayed bleeding in multi-variate analysis. 95%CI for percent of delayed bleedingaccording to polyp size was determined for the fol-lowing conditions: size ≤ 10 mm, 0.05%-0.43%; 20 mm ≥ size 10 mm, 0.54%-2.08%; size 20 mm, 4.22%-11.41%. 95%CI was determined for the risk of serious immediate bleeding for a polyp ≤ 10 mm was 0.10%-0.56%. Finally, 95%CI for percent of incomplete resection was 0.07%-0.49% in polyps ≤ 10 mm. CONCLUSION: It seems acceptable to perform outpa-tient-based EMR for colon polyps ≤ 10 mm.     

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for laterally spreading tumors larger than 20 mm

Background and Aims: Colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LST) > 20 mm are usually treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (EPMR) is sometimes required. The aim of our study was to compare the outcomes of ESD and EMR, including EPMR, for such LST. Methods: A total of 269 consecutive patients with a colorectal LST > 20 mm were treated endoscopically at our hospital from April 2006 to December 2009. We retrospectively evaluated the complications and local recurrence rates associated with ESD, hybrid ESD (ESD with EMR), EMR, and EPMR. Results: ESD and EMR were performed successfully for 89 and 178 LST, respectively: 61 by ESD; 28 by hybrid ESD; 70 by EMR; and 108 by EPMR. Between‐group differences in perforation rates were not significant. Local recurrence rates in cases with curative resection were as follows: 0% (0/56) in ESD; 0% (0/27) in hybrid ESD; 1.4% (1/69) in EMR; and 12.1% (13/107) in EPMR; that is, significantly higher in EPMR. No metastasis was seen at follow up. The recurrence rate for EPMR yielding ≥ three pieces was significantly high (P < 0.001). All 14 local recurrent lesions were adenomas that were cured endoscopically. Conclusions: As for safety, ESD/hybrid ESD is equivalent to EMR/EPMR. ESD/hybrid ESD is a feasible technique for en bloc resection and showed no local recurrence. Although local recurrences associated with EMR/EPMR were seen, which were conducted based on our indication criteria, all local recurrences could obtain complete cure by additional endoscopic treatment.     

Multicenter study of endoscopic mucosal resection using 0.13 % hyaluronic acid solution of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size

Purpose

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps should be curative and safe. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of colorectal EMR using 0.13 % hyaluronic acid (HA) solution.

Methods

This was a single-armed multicenter prospective open trial conducted at 11 Japanese institutions. Lesion characteristics and various measures of clinical outcome, including en bloc resection, histopathologically complete resection, and postoperative bleeding were analyzed for 624 consecutive patients who underwent EMR of colorectal polyps at ≤20 mm in size from August 2010 to September 2011.

Results

En bloc and complete resection were achieved in 93.3 and 78.3 % of 624 lesions. The median EMR procedure time was 2.1?±?1.5 min. The rates of postoperative bleeding and perforation were 1.1 and 0 %. The rate of en bloc resection was higher for polyps at 5–10 mm than for polyps at 11–20 mm (95.1 vs. 85.1 %; P?<?0.001) and was higher for protruding polyps than for superficial polyps (94.5 vs. 87.1 %; P?<?0.05). The rate of en bloc resection was also higher for polyps in the left-side colon than for those in the right-side colon or rectum (96.7 vs. 91.6 vs. 90.8 %; P?<?0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that polyp at 11–20 mm in size and location not on the left-side colon was significantly independent risk factors for failure of en bloc resection.

Conclusion

EMR using 0.13 % HA of colorectal polyps less than 20 mm in size had high rates of en bloc and complete resection and few complications.     

Endoscopic resection techniques for colorectal neoplasia:Current developments

Endoscopic polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR) are the established treatment standards for colorectal polyps. Current research aims at the reduction of both complication and recurrence rates as well as on shortening procedure times. Cold snare resection is the emerging standard for the treatment of smaller(< 5 mm) polyps and is possibly also suitable for the removal of noncancerous polyps up to 9 mm. The method avoids thermal damage, has reduced procedure times and probably also a lower risk for delayed bleeding. On the other end of the treatment spectrum, endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD)offers en bloc resection of larger flat or sessile lesions. The technique has obvious advantages in the treatment of high-grade dysplasia and early cancer. Due to its minimal recurrence rate, it may also be an alternative to fractionated EMR of larger flat or sessile lesions. However, ESD is technically demanding and burdened by longer procedure times and higher costs. It should therefore be restricted to lesions suspicious for high-grade dysplasia or early invasive cancer.The latest addition to endoscopic resection techniques is endoscopic fullthickness resection with specifically developed devices for flexible endoscopy.This method is very useful for the treatment of smaller difficult-to-resect lesions,e.g., recurrence with scar formation after previous endoscopic resections.     

Large polyps: Pearls for the referring and receiving endoscopist

Polyps are precursors to colorectal cancer, the third most common cancer in the United States. Large polyps, i.e.,, those with a size ≥ 20 mm, are more likely to harbor cancer. Colonic polyps can be removed through various techniques, with the goal to completely resect and prevent colorectal cancer; however, the management of large polyps can be relatively complex and challenging. Such polyps are generally more difficult to remove en bloc with conventional methods, and depending on level of expertise, may consequently be resected piecemeal, leading to an increased rate of incomplete removal and thus polyp recurrence. To effectively manage large polyps, endoscopists should be able to: (1) Evaluate the polyp for characteristics which predict high difficulty of resection or incomplete removal; (2) Determine the optimal resection technique (e.g., snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, etc.); and (3) Recognize when to refer to colleagues with greater expertise. This review covers important considerations in this regard for referring and receiving endoscopists and methods to best manage large colonic polyps.