Colonoscopic polypectomy in retroflexion

BACKGROUND: Little has been written about the value of retroflexion in the removal of large sessile colon polyps. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the utility of retroflexion for removal of large sessile colon polyps. DESIGN: This was a retrospective evaluation of consecutive cases. SETTING: This study was conducted at an academic-hospital-based tertiary-referral colonoscopy practice. PATIENTS: The study comprised consecutive patients with sessile polyps > or = 2 cm who were undergoing endoscopic resection. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention was endoscopic resection of 59 consecutive sessile colon polyps 2 cm or larger in size and located proximal to the rectum by using prototype colonoscopes with short bending sections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measurement was successful endoscopic resection. RESULTS: Fourteen of the polyps were removed either entirely (n = 4) or partially (n = 10) in retroflexion. Patients with polyps that were removed in retroflexion were more likely to have been referred by another colonoscopist than those patients with polyps removed entirely in the forward view (p = 0.05). There were no perforations and no complications related to retroflexion. LIMITATIONS: The study is retrospective, and the practice is a tertiary referral colonoscopy practice. The colonoscopes used are not widely available at this time. CONCLUSIONS: Retroflexion is a useful adjunctive procedure for the removal of some colon polyps proximal to the rectum that are difficult to access endoscopically. The use of retroflexion can increase the fraction of proximal sessile colon polyps amenable to endoscopic resection.     

Routine rectal retroflexion during colonoscopy has a low yield for neoplasia

AIM： To investigate the value of retroflexion in detecting neoplasia in the distal rectum. METHODS： This was a prospective observational study performed in an academic endoscopy unit. Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy had careful forward viewing of the distal rectum by retroflexion. Of 1502 procedures, 1076 （72%） procedures were performed with a 140^o angle of view colonoscope and 426 （28%） were performed with a 170^o angle of view colonoscope. The outcome measurement was the yield of neoplasia in the distal rectum detected by forward viewing vs retroflexion. RESULTS： A total of 1502 patients, including 767 （51%） females and 735 （49%） males, with mean age of 58.8 ± 12.5 years were enrolled. Retroflexion was successful in 1411 （93.9%） patients, unsuccessful or not performed because the rectum appeared narrow in 91 （6.1%）. Forty patients had a polyp detected in the distal rectal mucosa. Thirty-three were visible in both the forward and retroflexed view （25 hyperplastic, 8 adenomatous）. Seven polyps were visualized only by retroflexion （6 hyperplastic sessile polyps, one 4 mm sessile tubular adenoma）. There was no significant difference in information added by retroflexion with 140^o vs 170^o angle of view instrument. CONCLUSION： To our knowledge, this is the largest reported evaluation of retroflexion in the rectum. Routine rectal retroflexion did not detect clinically important neoplasia after a careful forward examination of the rectum to the dentate line. Since retroflexion has risks and may cause discomfort, theuse of routine retroflexion should be at the discretion of the endoscopist.     

Impact of proximal colon retroflexion on adenoma miss rates

BACKGROUND: Small adenomas are commonly missed during routine colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether routine retroflexion in the proximal colon would improve adenoma detection rates. METHODS: One hundred patients underwent colonoscopy from the cecum to the splenic flexure by a gastroenterology fellow, with the removal of all visualized polyps. The cecum was then reintubated and patients were randomized to a second exam of the proximal colon by an experienced staff physician in either the forward view or a retroflexed view. RESULTS: Two patients were excluded due to a difficult initial cecal intubation. Forty-eight patients were randomized to forward view and 50 patients were randomized to a retroflexed view. Retroflexion was successful in the cecum in 60%, the ascending colon 100%, and the transverse colon 98%. The success in retroflexion was determined in part by the type of colonoscope used. If any portion of the retroflexed examination could not be performed, that reexamination was performed in the forward view. The calculated miss rates for all polyps and adenomas among patients randomized to second examination in the forward view was 36.8% and 33.3%, respectively. The calculated miss rate for all polyps and for adenomas among patients randomized to a second examination in the retroflexed view was 38.1% and 23.7%, respectively. There was no difference in miss rates for all polyps or for adenomas (p= 0.31) when the second examination was performed in the forward view versus retroflexed view. CONCLUSIONS: A second examination by retroflexion in the proximal colon did not increase the calculated miss rate relative to that performed by a forward view examination. These results do not support the addition of routine right colon retroflexion to colonoscopy.     

Adenocarcinoma in solitary large hyperplastic polyp diagnosed by magnifying colonoscope: report of a case

We report a case of carcinoma in a hyperplastic polyp in a 78-year-old female that was diagnosed before resection using a magnifying colonoscope. The patient presented with fecal occult blood and underwent total colonoscopy, which revealed a 12-mm sessile polyp in the cecum. When seen in magnified view, an irregularly shaped pit was evident at the center of the polyp that was distinct from the asteroid-type pits observed over most of the lesion. We diagnosed this lesion as a hyperplastic polyp with a carcinoma component. The patient underwent endoscopic mucosal resection, and histologic section revealed a well-differentiated intramucosal adenocarcinoma in the hyperplastic polyp. Hyperplastic polyps of the colon are regarded as benign, nonneoplastic lesions. Few have reported carcinomas in or with hyperplastic polyps, and most of those were diagnosed after resection and histologic investigation. The literature suggests a precise observation and consideration of resection for large solitary hyperplastic polyps in the right side of the colon, because the risk of malignancy is high. Magnifying colonoscopy is helpful for observing the surface in detail and for correctly diagnosing and managing the lesion.     

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUNDS: Endoscopic polypectomy is a common technique, but there are discrepancies over which treatment--surgical or endoscopic--to follow in case of polyps of 2 cm or larger. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the efficacy and complications of colonoscopic polypectomy of large colorectal polyps. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 147 polypectomies were performed on 142 patients over an eight-year period. The technique used was that of submucosal adrenaline 1:10000 or saline injection at the base of the polyp, followed by resection of the polyp using a diathermic snare in the smallest number of fragments. Remnant adenomatous tissue was fulgurated with an argon plasma coagulator. Lately, prophylactic hemoclips have been used for thick-pedicle polyps. Complete removal was defined as when a polyp was completely resected in one or more polypectomy sessions. Polypectomy failure was defined as when a polyp could not be completely resected or contained an invasive carcinoma. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 67.9 years (range, 4-90 years), with 68 men and 79 women. There were 74 sessile polyps, and the most common location was the sigmoid colon. The most frequent histology was tubulovillous. Most of the polyps (96.6%), were resected and cured. This was not achieved in four cases of invasive carcinoma, and a villous polyp of the cecum. All pedunculated polyps were resected in one session, whereas the average number of colonoscopies for sessile polyps was 1.35 +/- 0.6 (range, 1-4). The polypectomy was curative in all of the in situ carcinomata except one. As for complications, 2 colonic perforations (requiring surgery) and 8 hemorrhages appeared, which were controlled via endoscopy. There was no associated mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic polypectomy of large polyps (> or =2 cm) is a safe, effective treatment, though it is not free from complications. Complete resection is achieved in a high percentage, and there are few relapses. It should be considered a technique of choice for this type of polyp, except in cases of invasive carcinoma.     

Colon polyp retrieval after cold snaring

BACKGROUND: The removal of small colon polyps by cold snare transection without electrocautery effectively eliminates polyps, and anecdotal reports indicate a low risk of bleeding and perforation. Concerns about using cold snaring have centered on the risk of immediate bleeding and the difficulty in retrieving the polyp. The objective was to determine the retrieval rates of polyps after cold snaring after two different methods of resection and retrieval. METHODS: Consecutive polyps were identified by a single colonoscopist who chose the technique of polypectomy (hot snare, cold snare, or cold forceps). If cold snaring was chosen, an independent observer assigned the polyp to method A (cold resection of polyp without tenting and then suction of the transected polyp into a trap) or method B (ensnare the polyp, pull it into the colonoscope channel, and then transect it while suctioning). The size and the approximate location of all polyps were recorded and all collected specimens were sent separately for histologic examination. Results Of 519 consecutively encountered polyps, 400 were removed by cold snare: 197 were assigned to method A and 203 to method B. The mean size of polyps that were cold snared was 3.5 mm. The mean time to remove and to retrieve polyps with method A was 14.5 seconds (n = 58) and with method B was 18.1 seconds (n = 60) ( p = 0.03). There were no complications from cold snaring. The rate of successful retrieval with method A was 100% (197 of 197 polyps) and with method B was 98% (199 of 203 polyps) ( p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Cold snare removal of colon polyps is associated with a high polyp retrieval rate. Each of two methods of polyp retrieval was effective. Snare transection without tenting of the polyp, followed by suctioning of the specimen off the polyp site, was more efficient, though the difference in efficiency was minimal. Difficulty or failure to retrieve polyps should not be a concern with regard to cold snare polypectomy.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polypectomy

PURPOSE: The advent of laparoscopic surgery has altered the manner by which surgical specialties address pathologies of the abdominal cavity. This advance in technology has also changed colorectal surgery. One of the more common procedures of colorectal surgery is segmental resection for polyps that are large, broad based, or inaccessible for colonoscopic removal. We present a technique combining colonoscopy and laparoscopy to remove troublesome polyps without the need for segmental resections. METHODS: From May 1990 to September 1999 laparoscopicmonitored colonic polypectomies were performed in 47 patients, with a total of 60 polyps being removed. After laparoscopic mobilization of the involved segment of the colon, the proximal bowel is cross-clamped and the colonoscope passed to the involved portion of the colon. The polyp is then presented to the colonoscopist by the laparoscopist facilitating removal. The serosal surface is monitored for any indications of transluminal injury, and the area is repaired if needed. All polyps undergo immediate frozen section analysis. If the pathologic evaluation indicates malignancy then a segmental resection may be performed, otherwise the patients are decompressed and fed within a short time before discharge. RESULTS: The polyps were located most commonly in the ascending colon (18 polyps), transverse colon (12 polyps), and cecum (12 polyps). The most common histopathologic diagnosis was tubulovillous adenoma in 28 polyps followed by villous adenoma in 11 polyps. In three cases histopathologic diagnosis revealed malignancy necessitating segmental resection (1 low anterior resection and 2 right hemicolectomies), which were performed laparoscopically. Patients received a liquid diet within 6 hours, were discharged in an average of 21 hours, and returned to full activity, usually within days. The only complication presented in this group of patients was an umbilical port seroma. Virtually all patients (97 percent) behaved as if only a colonoscopy had been performed. Pain at the trocar sites was managed with acetaminophen 600 mg by mouth as needed. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic-monitored colonoscopic polypectomy allows patients to undergo removal of colonic polyps without a segmental resection. This less invasive procedure yields recovery times similar to that of colonoscopy alone, and the potential complications of a segmental resection are avoided. All polyps are examined by frozen section, and if a malignancy is encountered, a laparoscopic resection can be performed.     

Short turn radius colonoscope in an anatomical model: Retroflexed withdrawal and detection of hidden polyps

AIM: To evaluate the new Retro View~(TM) colonoscope and compare its ability to detect simulated polyps "hidden" behind colonic folds with that of a conventional colonoscope, utilizing anatomic colon models.METHODS: Three anatomic colon models were prepared,with twelve simulated polyps "hidden" behind haustral folds and five placed in easily viewed locations in each model. Five blinded endoscopists examined two colon models in random order with the conventional or Retro View~(TM) colonoscope, utilizing standard withdrawal technique. The third colon model was then examined with the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope withdrawn initially in retroflexion and then in standard withdrawal. Polyp detection rates during standard and retroflexed withdrawal of the conventional and Retro View~(TM) colonoscopes were determined. Polyp detection rates for combined standard and retroflexed withdrawal(combination withdrawal) with the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope were also determined.RESULTS: For hidden polyps, retroflexed withdrawal using the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope detected more polyps than the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal(85% vs 12%, P = 0.0001). For hidden polyps, combination withdrawal with the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope detected more polyps than the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal(93% vs 12%, P ≤ 0.0001). The Retro View~(TM) colonoscope in "combination withdrawal" was superior to other methods in detecting all(hidden + easily visible) polyps, with successful detection of 80 of 85 polyps(94%) compared to 28(32%) polyps detected by the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal(P 0.0001) and 67(79%) polyps detected by the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope in retroflexed withdrawal alone(P 0.01). Continuous withdrawal of the colonoscope through the colon model while retroflexed was achieved by all endoscopists. In a post-test survey, four out of five colonoscopists reported that manipulation of the colonoscope was easy or very easy.CONCLUSION: In simulated testing, the Retro View~(TM) colonoscope increased detection of hidden polyps. Combining standard withdrawal with retroflexed withdrawal may become the new paradigm for "complete screening colonoscopy".     

Endoscopic management of large colorectal polyps

Objectives  The optimal treatment for large colorectal polyps (LCPs) is still a controversial issue. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic polypectomy (EP) of colorectal polyps ≥2 cm in size. Patients and methods  One hundred fifty-one EP LCPs were performed over a period of 7 years. Diathermal snare was used for pedunculated and pseudopedunculated polyps and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or biopsy forceps polypectomy for sessile and flat polyps. The resected polyps were recovered and collected for histology. At scheduled follow-up visits 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after polypectomy, complications and recurrences were recorded in all patients. Results  Fifteen polyps were located in the rectum, 84 in the sigmoid colon, 11 in the descending colon, four in the splenic flexure, 11 in the transverse colon, 11 in the hepatic flexure, seven in the ascending colon and eight in the cecum. Fifty-six polyps were sessile, 54 pedunculated, 25 pseudopedunculated, and 16 flat. At histology, most of polyps (131) were adenomas (nine with adenocarcinoma in situ). Five were invasive polypoid carcinomas and required colonic resection. Immediate bleeding occurred in ten patients (7.6%) and it was stopped by endoscopic hemoclips (7), epinephrine injection (1), or surgery (2). There were three perforations (2.3%; all polypoid carcinomas), managed endoscopically (1) or surgically (2). Delayed bleeding occurred in two patients (1.5%) and was treated by endoscopic diathermy and hemoclips (1) or surgery (1). During follow-up, six (4.6%) incompletely excised polyps and three (2.3%) relapses in the site of previous EP were detected and endoscopically removed. Conclusion  EP is relatively safe and effective for benign-appearing LCPs.     

Endoscopic resection of large sessile colorectal polyps.

Colonoscopic removal of large, sessile polyps is difficult, but can be successfully carried out by experienced endoscopists. "Piecemeal" resection with an electrocautery snare was performed at our institution in 108 patients with 132 such lesions. The mean size of the unresected polyps was 3.0 cm. Complications occurred in 3.0% of polypectomies (3.8% of patients), with bleeding necessitating transfusion in 2.3% of polypectomies (2.8% of patients), and microperforation (probable) in the remainder. No patient required emergency surgery due to a complication. In 65 patients (60%), colonoscopic resection and follow-up alone was carried out. Of these, adenomas recurred/persisted in 28%, most of which were successfully re-resected. Nearly half of all recurrent polyps occurred after at least one negative intervening examination. Carcinoma later appeared in 17% of the recurrences despite apparent initial complete resection of a previously benign polyp. Cure was ultimately achieved in 88% of endoscopically managed patients. Surgical resection was required in 27% of patients, mostly following the initial polypectomy when invasive carcinoma was found in the specimen. No residual tumor was later found in 41% of the colon specimens from these patients. Ninety-one percent of cancers were favorable stage, whether discovered early or late. Follow-up colonoscopy was achieved in 77% of patients over an average of 3.7 years. Metachronous polyps were excised in 52 patients (63%) and metachronous carcinoma was diagnosed in 3 patients (3.6%). An aggressive regimen of surveillance colonoscopy is warranted in these patients to detect and manage local recurrences and to remove subsequent adenomas. Endoscopic resection of large sessile adenomas can be safe and effective.     

Modification of endoscopic mucosal resection to collect plural polypectomied specimens with clip connected with string using a one‐channel colonoscope

Background: Multiple colon polyps and early cancers are often detected at colonoscopy, but we could not collect all polypectomied specimens in one insertion of a colonoscope. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) may often be very difficult for the collection of the size, type, form, or location of the polyps. Methods: We performed EMR to collect plural polypectomied specimens by a modified new technique using a clip connected with a string in 40 patients (25 male, 15 female) who visited Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital and Mitsubishi Kobe Hospital for colonoscopic treatment. The method was as follows: (i) insert a colonoscope; (ii) check polyps by indigocarmine pigmentation and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS); (iii) check the lift‐up sign by submucosal injection of 2.5% hypersaline‐epinephrine containing indigocarmine; (iv) make a clip connected with string (Tegusu‐3 go) and insert the clip kit through the channel of the colonoscope; (v) clip the polyp; (vi) insert snare in the channel of an endoscope, passing the string through the center of the snare; (vii) snare the polyp with counter traction of string and cutting by bipolar electric power; (viii) check for bleeding. If there is bleeding from the polypectomied site, another clip is necessary; and (ix) collect polyp. If there are many polyps, flags connecting the string are required. Results and Conclusion: All polyps were treated and collected in all patients by one insertion of the colonoscope without complications. Our modified EMR method was useful in the collection of multiple polypectomied polyps.     

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.     

Pit pattern type analyses of colon polyps with high-resolution colonoscope

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Correlations among pit pattern types and some characteristics of colon polyps were assessed with high-resolution colonoscope in Turkish patients. METHODOLOGY: Sixty-five patients were included in the study. All visible polyps and distal 30cm of colon were stained with indigo carmine 0.4% after standard colonoscopic examination. Then, pit pattern analyses were done. Correlations were evaluated and results were interpreted as significant if p < 0.05. RESULTS: There were correlations among the pit pattern types of polyps and their size, location, morphology and histology. Adenomatous polyps (type III,IV,V) were mostly located in the right colon, nonadenomatous polyps (type I/II) were mostly in the left. Ratio of having adenomatous structure increased in a parallel course with increase in polyp's size. While most of the nonadenomatous polyps were with type I,II, adenomatous polyps were with type III, IV, V patterns. Most of the type II, III, IV polyps were sessile and type I polyps were flat. Sensitivity and specificity of adenomatous and nonadenomatous polyps were 80% and 89% respectively and overall accuracy rate was 87%. Type III/IV were the best estimated type among the others. After chromoendoscopy, 35% increase in polyp number was also detected. CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution endoscope is successful for prediction of histology of colorectal polyps.     

Handcrafted two-channel colonoscope for grasping-forceps-assisted resection of giant pedunculated polyps

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic polypectomy of giant pedunculated polyps has an increased risk of bleeding and is technically difficult. To facilitate the removal of the polyps, we handcrafted a two-channel colonoscope and applied it for grasping-forceps-assisted resection. METHODS: We easily handcrafted a two-channel colonoscope by taping a plastic tube along the shaft of a standard colonoscope and used it for the technique in 10 patients with 12 giant pedunculated polyps. OBSERVATIONS: The colonoscope with forceps assistance proved to be satisfactory for handling detachable and polypectomy snares. Immediate bleeding occurred in one patient because the detachable snare could not be maneuvered over the polyp. In 3 patients, the plastic tube became mobile during the procedure because the tape that attached the tube became loose. No other complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: A handcrafted two-channel colonoscope for grasping-forceps-assisted resection of giant pedunculated polyps is effective for the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding and the reduction of technical difficulties.     

Colonoscopy surveillance for high risk polyps does not always prevent colorectal cancer

AIM To determine the frequency and risk factors for colorectal cancer(CRC) development among individuals with resected advanced adenoma(AA)/traditional serrated adenoma(TSA)/advanced sessile serrated adenoma(ASSA). METHODS Data was collected from medical records of 14663 subjects found to have AA, TSA, or ASSA at screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease or known genetic predisposition for CRC were excluded from the study. Factors associated with CRC developing after endoscopic management of high risk polyps were calculated in 4610 such patients who had at least one surveillance colonoscopy within 10 years following the original polypectomy of the incident advanced polyp. RESULTS84/4610(1.8%) patients developed CRC at the polypectomy site within a median of 4.2 years(mean 4.89 years), and 1.2%(54/4610) developed CRC in a region distinct from the AA/TSA/ASSA resection site within a median of 5.1 years(mean 6.67 years). Approximately, 30%(25/84) of patients who developed CRC at the AA/TSA/ASSA site and 27.8%(15/54) of patients who developed CRC at another site had colonoscopy at recommended surveillance intervals. Increasing age; polyp size; male sex; right-sided location; high degree of dysplasia; higher number of polyps resected; and piecemeal removal were associated with an increased risk for CRC developmentat the same site as the index polyp. Increasing age; right-sided location; higher number of polyps resected and sessile endoscopic appearance of the index AA/TSA/ASSA were significantly associated with an increased risk for CRC development at a different site. CONCLUSION Recognition that CRC may develop following AA/TSA/ASSA removal is one step toward improving our practice efficiency and preventing a portion of CRC related morbidity and mortality.     

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 >or=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 >or=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 >or=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 >or=20 mm in size. A stricter follow-up may be required for larger lesions because of a higher risk of recurrence.     

Management of small and diminutive polyps

Cold forceps are an appropriate tool for resection of 1-3-mm polyps that can be engulfed in a single bite. Jumbo and large-capacity forceps are more likely to engulf a tiny polyp in a single bite and are more effective and efficient than standard-size forceps. Cold snaring (transection of a polyp by guillotining without the use of electrocautery current) is more effective than either cold or hot forceps for resection of small polyps and can be used for polyps 1-9 mm in size. The size at which hot snaring (the use of snare and cautery in the traditional manner for polypectomy) should be used is unknown, but the author often uses hot snaring for pedunculated polyps, bulky sessile polyps, and proximal colon serrated polyps that are 6-9 mm in size. The cold snaring technique involves grasping a rim of normal tissue around the polyp and does not require tenting, and is therefore fundamentally different than hot snaring. Hot forceps should only be used for polyps ≤5 mm in size, it can leave residual polyp and create a thermal injury that risks delayed hemorrhage and rarely perforation. The author never uses hot forceps. The current paradigm of diminutive polyp (polyps ≤5 mm in size) management is to resect and send for pathologic evaluation. The pathology (adenoma vs hyperplastic) following removal is used to guide the postpolypectomy surveillance interval. Polyps in this size range very rarely have cancer, and infrequently have either villous elements or high-grade dysplasia. This observation has generated interest in developing endoscopic imaging technologies that could serve as alternatives to the pathologist's examination of diminutive polyps and would be less expensive than the histologic evaluation. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has recommended minimum performance thresholds for imaging technologies with regard to 2 clinically relevant end points: (1) a policy of “resect and discard” for high-confidence interpretations of diminutive polyps anywhere in the colon and (2) leaving distal colon hyperplastic polyps in place without resection. Several technologies appear promising with regard to reaching the recommended performance thresholds, and additional study of how well they function when used by community endoscopists is awaited.