Cold snare polypectomy versus cold endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Author:
Vishali MOOND
1
;
Priyadarshini LOGANATHAN
;
Sheza MALIK
;
Dushyant Singh DAHIYA
;
Babu P. MOHAN
;
Daryl RAMAI
;
Michele MCGINNIS
;
Deepak MADHU
;
Mohammad BILAL
;
Aasma SHAUKAT
;
Saurabh CHANDAN
Author Information
- Publication Type:Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- From:Clinical Endoscopy 2024;57(6):747-758
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background/Aims:Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is routinely performed for small colorectal polyps (≤10 mm). However, challenges include insufficient resection depth and immediate bleeding, hindering precise pathological evaluation. We aimed to compare the outcomes of cold endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) with that of CSP for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm, using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods:Multiple databases were searched in December 2023 for RCTs reporting outcomes of CSP versus CEMR for colorectal polyps ≤10 mm in size. Our primary outcomes were rates of complete and en-bloc resections, while our secondary outcomes were total resection time (seconds) and adverse events, including immediate bleeding, delayed bleeding, and perforation.
Results:The complete resection rates did not significantly differ (CSP, 91.8% vs. CEMR 94.6%), nor did the rates of en-bloc resection (CSP, 98.9% vs. CEMR, 98.3%) or incomplete resection (CSP, 6.7% vs. CEMR, 4.8%). Adverse event rates were similarly insignificant in variance. However, CEMR had a notably longer mean resection time (133.51 vs. 91.30 seconds).
Conclusions:Our meta-analysis of seven RCTs showed that while both CSP and CEMR are equally safe and effective for resecting small (≤10 mm) colorectal polyps, the latter is associated with a longer resection time.
