A122 OUTCOMES OF COLD SNARE POLYPECTOMY FOR POLYPS GREATER THAN 20 MM: DATA FROM AN ACADEMIC CENTER
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is widely utilized for resection of small polyps (less than 10mm), due to the technique’s favourable safety profile. However, Hot Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (HSEMR) remains the standard of care for large polyps greater than or equal to 20mm. HSEMR carries an increased risk of complications. These include delayed bleeding, perforation, and post-polypectomy syndrome, along with residual or recurrent adenomatous (RRA). More recently, Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (CSEMR) technique has been used selectively for polyps greater than 20mm. Published studies have demonstrated a significantly lower adverse event rate of complications as compared with HSEMR. RRA utilizing CSP remains a concern, with a recent publication reporting a recurrence of 34.8% on follow-up endoscopy. We present the experience at a single Canadian academic centre with patients undergoing CSEMR for polyps greater than 20mm. Aims To demonstrate the efficacy and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection CSEMR of large (greater than or equal to 20mm) polyps at a single Canadian academic centre. Methods We retrospectively reviewed colonoscopies performed by endoscopists employing this technique at our centre from January 2020 to August 2021. 15 total cases were identified for patients with polyps greater than or equal to 20 mm, removed by CSEMR technique. Results Patient age ranged from 41 to 76, with a median patient age was 66. There were 10 males and 5 females. There were no adverse events intraoperatively. 15/15 (100%) polyps were successfully resected using CSEMR technique. Polyp size ranged from 2 cm to 7 cm, and there was a median polyp size of 3 cm. 14/15 (93%) polyps were proximal to the splenic flexure, with 1/15 (7%) polyp in the rectum. 6/15 (40%) patients received snare tip soft coagulation to the edges of the polypectomy site. Polyp histology included 7 tubular adenomas, 3 tubulovillous adenomas, 4 sessile serrated polyps, and one hyperplastic polyp. Two patients were on aspirin 81 mg daily, and there were zero patients on any other antiplatelets or anticoagulation. 1/15 patient presented with late bleeding requiring emergent colonoscopy. There were no immediate or delayed perforations or other serious adverse events recorded. Approximately 50% of patients have had follow-up colonoscopy within 3–6 months of their initial procedure. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 252 days, with a median time to follow up of 171 days. 3/7 (43%) patients had histologic evidence of recurrence at follow-up colonoscopy, all of which were successfully treated endoscopically. Conclusions Selective CSEMR is a safe and effective technique, with a low risk of complications. There may be a higher rate of residual polyp at follow-up colonoscopy compared to HSEMR. This data will need further validation with a larger sample size. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».