Search

A correction to the article "Is Endoscopic Closure With Clips Effective for Both Diagnostic and Therapeutic Colonoscopy-Associated Bowel Perforation?" that was published in the April 17, 2010 issue is presented.

Background: The recurrence rate after standard cold forceps polypectomy (CFP) of diminutive polyps of ≤5 mm has not been fully determined. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term follow-up results and recurrence rate after CFP of diminutive polyps.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 884 (738 men; age 53 years) asymptomatic subjects who underwent surveillance colonoscopy after CFP of 1-2 diminutive adenomatous polyps. Cumulative recurrence at the CFP site and risk factors for recurrence were analyzed.Results: Overall recurrence over 59.7 months was 17 % after CFP of 1111 diminutive polyps. The rate of definite recurrence was 4 %, and probable recurrence was 13 %. Recurrence as advanced adenoma was 0.5 % (5/1111). The cumulative probabilities of recurrence at 3, 5, and 7 years after CFP were 10.0, 16.0, and 21.1 %, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that polyp 4-5 mm in size and right colonic polyp were risk factors for recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.86 and HR 1.49; 95 % CI 1.08-2.04, respectively). The recurrence rate for 10 endoscopists who performed at least 50 CFPs ranged from 11.0 to 25.2 %; the probability of recurrence in those in the top half in terms of recurrence rate was 1.6-fold higher than that of those in the bottom half (95 % CI 1.17-2.19).Conclusions: Although recurrence may develop after standard CFP of diminutive polyps, recurrence as advanced adenoma is rare. Large polyp size, right colon polyp, and endoscopist are risk factors for recurrence after standard CFP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact of one-stage polypectomy (removal of all neoplasms during diagnostic colonoscopy) versus two-stage polypectomy (removal of all neoplasms during therapeutic colonoscopy following the initial diagnostic colonoscopy) on the development of metachronous neoplasms is poorly understood. Our aim was to compare the effects of one- versus two-stage polypectomy on the development of metachronous neoplasms Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 249 patients in a tertiary center who underwent one-stage polypectomy, which was followed by one or more surveillance colonoscopy. The development of metachronous neoplasm in this group was compared with that of an age- and sex-matched two-stage polypectomy group consisting of 498 patients Results: In total, 346 (46.3 %) patients developed any metachronous neoplasm and 29 (3.9 %) patients developed advanced metachronous neoplasm. The 5 years cumulative incidences of any and advanced metachronous neoplasm were 46.2 and 5.0 %, respectively, in the one-stage group, which are not significantly different from the rates of 50.7 and 3.3 % in the two-stage group ( p = 0.94 and 0.30, respectively). The only significant risk factor for developing any metachronous neoplasm was ≥3 neoplasms at the baseline polypectomy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.75; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.41-2.17; p < 0.001]. The only significant risk factor for developing advanced metachronous neoplasm was advanced neoplasm at the baseline polypectomy (HR 2.37; 95 % CI 1.16-4.84; p = 0.01). One- and two-stage polypectomy did not affect the development rates of metachronous neoplasm Conclusions: The risks of developing metachronous neoplasm may be similar following one- and two-stage polypectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]