Kim Jeongseok, Gweon Tae-Geun, Kwak Min Seob, Kim Su Young, Kim Seong Jung, Kim Hyun Gun, Hong Sung Noh, Kim Eun Sun, Moon Chang Mo, Myung Dae Seong, Baek Dong-Hoon, Oh Shin Ju, Lee Hyun Jung, Lee Ji Young, Jung Yunho, Chun Jaeyoung, Yang Dong-Hoon, Kim Eun Ran
Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Gut Liver. 2025 Jan 15;19(1):77-86. doi: 10.5009/gnl240217. Epub 2025 Jan 3.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: We investigated the clinical practice patterns of Korean endoscopists for the endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps.
From September to November 2021, an online survey was conducted regarding the preferred resection methods for colorectal polyps, and responses were compared with the international guidelines.
Among 246 respondents, those with <4 years, 4-9 years, and ≥10 years of experience in colonoscopy practices accounted for 25.6%, 34.1%, and 40.2% of endoscopists, respectively. The most preferred resection methods for non-pedunculated lesions were cold forceps polypectomy for ≤3 mm lesions (81.7%), cold snare polypectomy for 4-5 mm (61.0%) and 6-9 mm (43.5%) lesions, hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for 10-19 mm lesions (72.0%), precut EMR for 20-25 mm lesions (22.0%), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for ≥26 mm lesions (29.3%). Hot EMR was favored for pedunculated lesions with a head size <20 mm and stalk size <10 mm (75.6%) and for those with a head size ≥20 mm or stalk size ≥10 mm (58.5%). For suspected superficial and deep submucosal lesions measuring 10-19 mm and ≥20 mm, ESD (26.0% and 38.6%) and surgery (36.6% and 46.3%) were preferred, respectively. The adherence rate to the guidelines ranged from 11.2% to 96.9%, depending on the size, shape, and histology of the lesions.
Adherence to the guidelines for endoscopic resection techniques varied depending on the characteristics of colorectal polyps. Thus, an individualized approach is required to increase adherence to the guidelines.
背景/目的:我们调查了韩国内镜医师进行大肠息肉内镜切除的临床实践模式。
2021年9月至11月,针对大肠息肉的首选切除方法进行了一项在线调查,并将结果与国际指南进行了比较。
在246名受访者中,结肠镜检查经验<4年、4 - 9年和≥10年的内镜医师分别占25.6%、34.1%和40.2%。对于无蒂病变,≤3 mm病变最常用的切除方法是冷活检钳息肉切除术(81.7%),4 - 5 mm(61.0%)和6 - 9 mm(43.5%)病变采用冷圈套息肉切除术,10 - 19 mm病变采用热内镜黏膜切除术(EMR,72.0%),20 - 25 mm病变采用预切开EMR(22.0%),≥26 mm病变采用内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD,29.3%)。对于头部大小<20 mm且蒂部大小<10 mm的带蒂病变(75.6%)以及头部大小≥20 mm或蒂部大小≥10 mm的带蒂病变(58.5%),热EMR是首选方法。对于怀疑为浅表和深部黏膜下病变,大小为10 - 19 mm和≥20 mm时,分别首选ESD(26.0%和38.6%)和手术(36.6%和46.3%)。根据病变的大小、形状和组织学,对指南的遵循率在11.2%至96.9%之间。
内镜切除技术指南的遵循情况因大肠息肉的特征而异。因此,需要采用个体化方法来提高对指南的遵循率。