Hot snare vs. cold snare polypectomy for endoscopic removal of 4 – 10 mm colorectal polyps during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Author:

Jegadeesan Ramprasad12,Aziz Muhammad12,Desai Madhav12,Sundararajan Tharani2,Gorrepati Venkata2,Chandrasekar Viveksandeep12,Jayaraj Mahendran3,Singh Pratiksha2,Saeed Ahmed2,Rai Tarun2,Choudhary Abhishek2,Repici Alessandro4,Hassan Cesare5,Fuccio Lorenzo6,Sharma Prateek12

Affiliation:

1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA

2. Department of Gastroenterology, Kansas City VA Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA

3. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA

4. Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research Hospital & Humanitas University, Milan, Italy

5. Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Rome, Italy

6. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Abstract

Abstract Introduction In recent years, cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has increasingly been used over hot snare polypectomy (HSP) for the removal of colorectal polyps (4 – 10 mm in size). However, the optimal technique (CSP vs. HSP), in terms of complete polyp resection and complications, is uncertain. Our aim was to compare incomplete resection rate (IRR) of polyps and complications using CSP vs. HSP. Methods Randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing CSP and HSP for removal of 4 – 10 mm colorectal polyps were considered. Studies were included in the analysis if they obtained biopsy specimens from the resection margin to confirm the absence of residual tissue and reported complications. IRR and complication rate were the outcome measures. Pooled rates were reported as Odds Ratios (OR) or risk difference with 95 % Confidence Interval (CI). Results In total, three RCTs were included in the final analysis. A total of 1051 patients with 1485 polyps were randomized to either HSP group (n = 741 polyps) or CSP group (n = 744 polyps). The overall IRR did not differ between the two groups (HSP vs. CSP: 2.4 % vs. 4.7 %; OR 0.51, 95 %CI 0.13 – 1.99, P = 0.33, I 2 = 73 %). The HSP group had a lower rate of overall complications compared to the CSP group (3.7 % vs. 6.6 %; OR 0.53, 95 % CI 0.3 – 0.94, P = 0.03, I 2 = 0 %). Polyp retrieval rates were not different between the two groups (99 % vs. 98.1 %). Conclusion Our results suggest that HSP and CSP techniques can be effectively used for the complete removal of 4 – 10 mm colorectal polyps; however, HSP has a lower incidence of overall complications.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

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