Digestive Disease Center, Showa Inan General Hospital, Komagane, Japan.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shinshu University Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan.
Endoscopy. 2016 Jul;48(7):646-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-105557. Epub 2016 Apr 21.
It is unclear whether endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or hot snare resection is better for resecting large nonpedunculated polyps. The aim of this study was to determine a cutoff size of nonpedunculated neoplastic colorectal polyps at which the risk of incomplete resection differed between EMR and hot snare resection.
Patients with nonpedunculated neoplastic polyps (10 - 25 mm in diameter) were randomly assigned to undergo endoscopic resection using EMR (52 patients with 63 polyps) or hot snare resection (52 patients with 62 polyps). EMR included submucosal injection of saline before resection. The primary outcome measure was the proportion with complete polyp resection determined by histopathology. The secondary outcome was total procedure time.
Patient characteristics were similar between groups. EMR achieved complete resection more frequently than hot snare resection (89 % vs. 73 %; P = 0.02), particularly for polyps ≥ 20 mm (75 % [9 /12] vs. 18 % [2 /11]; P = 0.006). A complete resection rate of > 90 % was achieved for polyps of size < 19 mm with EMR, and for polyps of size ≤ 14 mm with hot snare resection. In multivariate analysis, incomplete resection was associated with hot snare resection (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95 % confidence interval (95 %CI) 1.0 - 8.3; P = 0.04) and polyp size ≥ 15 mm (OR 4.0, 95 %CI 1.3 - 14; P = 0.01). Total procedure time was shorter with hot snare resection than with EMR (mean 14.8 min vs. 17.2 min; P < 0.001).
EMR and hot snare resection appear to achieve similar complete resection rates for polyps up to 14 mm; however, EMR may be superior for larger polyps, particularly for those ≥ 20 mm.Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT 01950117.
目前尚不清楚内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)和热圈套切除术哪种方法更适合切除较大的无蒂息肉。本研究旨在确定无蒂结直肠肿瘤性息肉的大小截断值,在此值以上,EMR 和热圈套切除术的不完全切除风险存在差异。
将直径为 10-25mm 的无蒂肿瘤性息肉患者随机分为 EMR 组(52 例 63 个息肉)和热圈套切除术组(52 例 62 个息肉)进行内镜切除。EMR 切除前先在黏膜下注射生理盐水。主要观察指标为组织病理学确定的完全息肉切除比例。次要观察指标为总手术时间。
两组患者的特征相似。EMR 的完全切除率明显高于热圈套切除术(89%比 73%;P=0.02),尤其是对于直径≥20mm 的息肉(75%[9/12]比 18%[2/11];P=0.006)。EMR 可使直径<19mm 的息肉达到>90%的完全切除率,而直径≤14mm 的息肉则使用热圈套切除术。多变量分析显示,不完全切除与热圈套切除术(比值比[OR] 2.8,95%置信区间[95%CI] 1.0-8.3;P=0.04)和息肉直径≥15mm(OR 4.0,95%CI 1.3-14;P=0.01)相关。热圈套切除术的总手术时间明显短于 EMR(平均 14.8 分钟比 17.2 分钟;P<0.001)。
EMR 和热圈套切除术用于直径达 14mm 以下的息肉时,其完全切除率似乎相似;然而,对于较大的息肉,EMR 可能更具优势,尤其是对于直径≥20mm 的息肉。临床试验注册:NCT 01950117。