Smith Eric, Wu Yizhong, Wang Yichen, Dahiya Dushyant Singh, Chandan Saurabh, Maida Marcello, Spadaccini Marco, Facciorusso Antonio, Shaukat Aasma, Ramai Daryl, Miranda Clive
Department of Medicine, Baylor Scott and White Health, Round Rock, TX.
Division of Hospital Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2025 Jan 15. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000002119.
Thermal ablative methods (such as argon plasma coagulation (APC) and soft tip snare coagulation (STSC) are commonly used to treat polyp margins. We aim to appraise the current literature and compare clinical outcomes between patients with treated (with APC vs. STSC) and non-treated endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) margins.
We searched major databases from inception until November 2023 for randomly controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps with and without treated margins. Pooled data were analyzed for the primary outcome of recurrence at first screening colonoscopy, and adverse events. Analysis was performed using a random effects model and data were reported using 95% CIs.
A total of 5 RCT's were found, which included 1020 polyps (577 in treatment and 443 in control groups). Three studies included treatment with STSC and 3 studies used APC as the modality for margin ablation. Of the included patients, 53% were female and the average age was similar between treatment and control groups (65.9 vs. 66.1 y). Seventy-one percent of lesions were proximal to the splenic flexure. The mean follow-up to the first colonoscopy and average polyp size were comparable (6.3 vs. 6.2 mo; 28.2 vs. 28.0 mm, respectively). Pooled analysis showed that margin ablation was associated with significantly lower rates of recurrence [odds ratio (OR) 0.267, 95% CI 0.18-0.4, P<0.001] with low heterogeneity between studies (I2=0%, P=0.47). Pooled analysis showed no significant difference between STSC and APC in terms of recurrence (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.27-1.7, I2=0%, P=0.3) or adverse events (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.3-1.6, I2 13%, P=0.46).
Our study shows that ablation of EMR margins is very effective at preventing recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy. We found no difference between STSC or APC in terms of polyp recurrence or adverse outcomes.
热消融方法(如氩等离子体凝固术(APC)和软圈套器凝固术(STSC))常用于处理息肉切缘。我们旨在评估当前文献,并比较接受治疗(APC与STSC)和未接受治疗的内镜黏膜切除术(EMR)切缘患者的临床结局。
我们检索了从数据库创建至2023年11月的主要数据库,以查找比较有或无处理切缘的大型无蒂结直肠息肉EMR的随机对照试验(RCT)。对汇总数据进行分析,以评估首次结肠镜筛查时复发的主要结局以及不良事件。使用随机效应模型进行分析,并使用95%置信区间报告数据。
共找到5项RCT,包括1020个息肉(治疗组577个,对照组443个)。3项研究采用STSC治疗,3项研究使用APC作为切缘消融方式。纳入患者中,53%为女性,治疗组和对照组的平均年龄相似(65.9岁对66.1岁)。71%的病变位于脾曲近端。首次结肠镜检查的平均随访时间和息肉平均大小具有可比性(分别为6.3个月对6.2个月;28.2毫米对28.0毫米)。汇总分析表明,切缘消融与显著较低的复发率相关[比值比(OR)0.267,95%置信区间0.18 - 0.4,P < 0.001],研究间异质性较低(I² = 0%,P = 0.47)。汇总分析表明,STSC和APC在复发率(OR 0.6,95%置信区间0.27 - 1.7,I² = 0%,P = 0.3)或不良事件(OR 0.67,95%置信区间0.3 - 1.6,I² 13%,P = 0.46)方面无显著差异。
我们的研究表明,EMR切缘消融在预防首次结肠镜监测时的复发方面非常有效。我们发现STSC或APC在息肉复发或不良结局方面没有差异。