Search

Background and Aims Postpolypectomy bleeding is the most common adverse event with pedunculated polyps. We clarified the endoscopic characteristics influencing postpolypectomy bleeding for pedunculated colonic polyps. Methods We reviewed clinical data for 1147 pedunculated colonic polyps removed by polypectomy in 5 Japanese institutions. Pedunculated polyps were defined as polyps with a stalk length ≥5 mm. Analyzed clinical data were age, sex, polyp location/size, stalk length/width, prophylactic clipping or endoloop before polypectomy, injecting the stalk, closing the polypectomy site, antithrombotic agent use, and endoscopist experience. Postpolypectomy bleeding was classified as immediate bleeding or delayed bleeding. Results Immediate and delayed bleeding was observed in 8.5% (97/1147) and 2% (23/1147) of polypectomies, respectively. Comparing immediate bleeding with nonbleeding, multivariate analysis showed that stalk width ≥6 mm (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.4) was a significant risk factor for immediate bleeding. For polyp size ≥15 mm, prophylactic endoloop use (OR, .17; 95% CI, .04-.72) was a significant inhibiting factor. Comparing delayed bleeding with nonbleeding, multivariate analysis showed that prophylactic clipping before polypectomy (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.3-13) and injecting the stalk (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-12) were significant risk factors for delayed bleeding. Conclusions The increased risk for delayed bleeding with injecting the stalk and prophylactic clipping before polypectomy suggests that simple resection with coagulation mode is a suitable strategy in endoscopic resection of pedunculated polyps. Moreover, prophylactic endoloop use was highly likely to inhibit immediate bleeding with polyp size ≥15 mm.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used as a minimally invasive treatment for large esophageal cancers, but prolonged procedure duration and life-threatening adverse events remain matters of concern. We aimed to determine whether traction-assisted ESD (TA-ESD) is superior to conventional ESD in terms of technical outcomes.A superiority, randomized, phase III trial was conducted at 7 institutions across Japan. Patients with large esophageal cancer (defined as tumor diameter20 mm) were eligible for this study. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to undergo conventional ESD or TA-ESD. The primary endpoint was ESD procedure duration.Two hundred forty-one patients were recruited and randomized. On applying exclusion criteria, 117 and 116 patients who underwent conventional ESD and TA-ESD, respectively, were included in the baseline analysis. In 1 patient, conventional ESD was discontinued because of severe perforation. Thus, the final analysis included 116 patients per group (primary analysis). The ESD procedure duration was significantly shorter for TA-ESD than for conventional ESD (44.5 minutes vs 60.5 minutes, respectively; P .001). Moreover, no adverse events were noted in the TA-ESD group. The rate of horizontal margin involvement did not differ between the groups (10.3% vs 6.9% for conventional ESD and TA-ESD, respectively; P = .484).TA-ESD was superior to conventional ESD in terms of procedure duration and was not associated with any adverse events. TA-ESD should be considered the procedure of choice for large esophageal cancers. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000024080.).