Complications of cold versus hot snare polypectomy of 10-20 mm polyps: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cold snare polypectomy is safe and efficacious for removing polyps <10 mm with reduced rates of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding and postpolypectomy syndrome. This technique can also be used for sessile polyps ≥10 mm; however, further evidence is required to establish its safety. The aim of this study was to compare intraprocedure and postprocedure adverse events in patients who underwent cold (CSP) versus hot snare polypectomy (HSP) of 10-20 mm sessile colonic polyps. METHODS: Electronic medical records and endoscopy reports of all patients who underwent polypectomy for Paris 0-IIa, Is, or 0-IIa + Is 10-20 mm colonic polyps between January 2015 and June 2017 at three tertiary academic hospitals and one private hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Data on patient demographics, polyp characteristics, method of polypectomy, and intraprocedural and postpolypectomy adverse events were collected. RESULTS: A total of 408 patients (median age 67, 50% male) had 604 polyps, 10-20 mm in size, removed. Of these, 258 polyps were removed by HSP, with a median size of 15 mm (interquartile range [IQR] 12-20), compared to 346 polyps that were removed by CSP, with median size of 12 mm (IQR 10-15), P < 0.001. In the HSP group, 15 patients presented with postprocedure complications, including 11 with clinically significant bleeding, 2 with postpolypectomy syndrome, and 2 with abdominal pain. This compares with no postpolypectomy complications in the CSP group, P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: In this study, CSP was not associated with any postpolypectomy adverse events. CSP appears to be safer than HSP for removing 10-20 mm-sized sessile polyps. A prospective multicenter study has been commenced to verify these findings and to assess the efficacy of CSP for the complete resection of polyps of this size.

A prospective comparison of cold snare polypectomy using traditional or dedicated cold snares for the resection of small sessile colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The evidence for efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the completeness of resection and safety of cold snare polypectomy, using either traditional or dedicated cold snares. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, non-randomized study performed at a single tertiary hospital. Adult patients with at least one colorectal polyp (size ≤ 10 mm) removed by cold snare were included. In the first phase, all patients had polyps removed by traditional snare without diathermy. In the second phase, all patients had polyps removed by dedicated cold snare. Complete endoscopic resection was determined from histological examination of quadrantic polypectomy margin biopsies. Immediate or delayed bleeding within 2 weeks was recorded. RESULTS: In total, 181 patients with 299 eligible polyps (n = 93 (173 polyps) traditional snare group, n = 88 (126 polyps) dedicated cold snare group) were included. Patient demographics and procedure indications were similar between groups. Mean polyp size was 6 mm in both groups ( P  = 0.25). Complete polyp resection was 165 /173 (95.4 %; 95 %CI 90.5 - 97.6 %) in the traditional snare group and 124/126 (98.4 %; 95 %CI 93.7 - 99.6 %) in the dedicated cold snare group ( P  = 0.16). Serrated polyps, compared with adenomatous polyps, had a higher rate of incomplete resection (7 % vs. 2 %, P  = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of immediate bleeding (3 % vs. 1 %, P  = 0.41) and there were no delayed hemorrhages or perforations. CONCLUSIONS: Cold snare polypectomy is effective and safe for the complete endoscopic resection of small (≤ 10 mm) colorectal polyps with either traditional or dedicated cold snares.

Risk stratification of upper GI bleeding with an esophageal capsule.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of upper GI bleeding (UGIB) presentations to our institutions suggests that many patients admitted for endoscopic investigation could be managed safely as outpatients. OBJECTIVE: To learn whether an esophageal capsule could identify a low-risk group of patients with UGIB who could safely wait for elective EGD. DESIGN: Diagnostic, nonrandomized, single-blind (investigator) study. SETTING: Three tertiary-care referral centers. PATIENTS: Eighty-three consecutive adult patients referred for management of UGIB. INTERVENTION: A capsule endoscopy (CE) was performed before EGD for the investigation and management of UGIB. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Detection rates of UGIB source and identification of a low-risk group of patients who would have been suitable for outpatient EGD based on CE findings. RESULTS: In total, 62 of 83 patients (75%) had a cause for bleeding identified. Findings were concordant across both modalities in 34 patients (55%). Twenty-one patients (38%) with positive EGD results had negative CE results, 7 of whom were due to lack of duodenal visualization alone. However, 7 of 28 patients (25%) with normal EGD results had positive CE results. The subgroup of patients with duodenal visualization on CE, 23 of 25 (92%), were concordant with EGD for low-risk lesions that would have been suitable for outpatient management. LIMITATIONS: Low duodenal visualization rates with CE and low concordance between EGD and CE. CONCLUSION: Although CE is not currently ready to be used as a triage tool, when duodenal visualization was achieved CE correlated well with EGD findings and identified 92% of patients who may have been managed as outpatients.

SINGLE-01: a randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and depth of insertion of single- and double-balloon enteroscopy by using a novel method to determine insertion depth.

BACKGROUND: Single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) was introduced as an alternative to double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) for the investigation and management of small-bowel conditions. To date, there is only 1 randomized, controlled trial comparing SBE and DBE in a Western population. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 2 instruments in a Western population to assess for differences in clinical outcomes and insertion depth (ID). A novel method to determine ID by counting folds on withdrawal was used. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: University hospitals in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia. PATIENTS: Patients with suspected or proven small-bowel disease. INTERVENTIONS: SBE and DBE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: The primary endpoint was diagnostic yield (DY). Secondary endpoints were therapeutic yield (TY), procedure times, and ID. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were screened, and 107 patients were enrolled between July 2008 and June 2010, in whom 119 procedures were undertaken (53 SBEs and 66 DBEs). DY was 57% for SBE and 53% for DBE (P = .697). TY was 32% for SBE and 26% for DBE (P = .490). The median enteroscopy times were identical for SBE and DBE at 60 minutes. The mean ID by the fold-counting method for antegrade procedures was 201.1 folds for SBE and 258.6 folds for DBE (P = .046). After multiple comparisons adjustment, this difference did not reach statistical significance. Mean IDs by using the visual estimation method for SBE and DBE were, respectively, 72.1 cm and 75.2 cm (P = .835) for retrograde procedures and 203.8 cm and 234.1 cm (P = .176) for antegrade procedures. LIMITATIONS: Unable to reach target sample size, mostly single-center recruitment, novel method to determine ID, which requires further validation. CONCLUSIONS: SBE has DY, TY, and procedure times similar to those of DBE. There were no statistically significant differences in ID between SBE and DBE. By using the fold-counting method for antegrade procedures, the estimated IDs for SBE and DBE were 201.1 folds versus 258.6 folds (P = .046; P = not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons). ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12609000917235.).

Thiopurine immunomodulators in ulcerative colitis: moving forward with current evidence.

The goals of treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC) are to induce and maintain corticosteroid-free remission, thereby reducing hospitalizations and surgeries and preventing longer-term disease complications including colorectal cancer. Despite an incomplete evidence base, thiopurine immunomodulators remain a principle therapeutic option for patients failing aminosalicylate monotherapy and requiring multiple courses of corticosteroids. In this review, we outline the current evidence supporting the role of thiopurines in achieving these treatment goals in UC, including discussions of the important safety issues regarding their use. We also explore some of the recent evidence emerging in regards to the risks of lymphoproliferative disease, dosage optimization strategies and the role of thiopurines in achieving mucosal healing in UC and ultimately changing natural history outcomes for our patients.