Effectiveness and safety of thin vs. thick cold snare polypectomy of small colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Khan Rishad1ORCID,Samnani Sunil1ORCID,Vaska Marcus2,Grover Samir C13ORCID,Walsh Catharine M456ORCID,Mosko Jeffrey7,Bourke Michael8,Heitman Steven J9ORCID,Forbes Nauzer9

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

2. Knowledge Resource Service, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Canada

3. Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada

4. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and the Research and Learning Institutes, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Canada

6. The Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

7. Gastroenterology, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada

8. Gastroenterology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia

9. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Abstract

Abstract Background and study aims Cold-snare polypectomy (CSP) is considered the standard of care for resection of colorectal polyps ≤10 mm. Data on the efficacy of CSP performed with thin-wire snares compared0 with thick-wire snares are conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis comparing complete resection (CR) and adverse event rates of CSP using thin-wire and thick-wire snares. Patients and methods Comparative studies of adult patients with ≧1 colorectal polyp(s) ≦10 mm who underwent CSP with thin-wire or thick-wire snares were included. We collected data on study, patient, polyp, and snare characteristics. The primary outcome was CR rate. Secondary outcomes were polyp retrieval rate, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed post-polypectomy bleeding, deep mural injury or perforation, patient discomfort, total sedation, and procedure time. We used random-effects models to calculate risk ratios for outcomes. We performed risk of bias assessments, rated the certainty of evidence, and assessed publication bias for all studies. Results We included four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two observational studies including 1316 patients with 1679 polyps (826 thin-wire CSPs and 853 thick-wire CSPs). There was no significant difference between thin-wire CSP (92.1%) and thick-wire CSP (87.7%) for RCTs (risk ratio [RR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94–1.16) or observational studies (78.1% versus 79.6%, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99–1.08). There were no significant differences in polyp retrieval rate or intraprocedural bleeding. There were no cases of delayed bleeding or perforation. Conclusions We found no differences in CR rates for CSP between thin-wire and thick-wire snares. CSP, regardless of snare type, is safe and effective for resection of small colorectal polyps.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3