“…Several recent studies examined microscopically the presence of residual lesions after CFP by observing specimens obtained immediately by biopsy or endoscopic mucosal resection of post-CFP ulcer edges. The incomplete resection rate ranged from 8 to 38 % [8][9][10][11]. Although these studies revealed a high rate of incomplete resection immediately after CFP of diminutive polyps, that does not necessarily mean that this rate is exactly the same as the real adenoma recurrence rate during follow-up because mechanical disruption of microvasculature and intercellular cohesiveness by CFP could theoretically lead to a loss of residual adenoma tissue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Those whose polyps were removed by any technique other than standard CFP were excluded. We also excluded those who had (1) 3 or more polyps; (2) polyps over 5 mm; (3) significant symptoms of colorectal disease (e.g., rectal bleeding); (4) colorectal examinations such as sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or barium enema within the previous 5 years; (5) a history of colorectal surgery or colorectal disease such as cancer or inflammatory bowel disease; (6) a history of colorectal cancer in first-degree relatives; (7) sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/P) removed; (8) colonoscopy that failed to reach the cecum; or (9) poor bowel preparation.…”
Section: Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the widespread use of standard CFP, there have been only a few studies of the clinical efficacy of this technique, and most of these raised concerns about incomplete polyp eradication [8][9][10][11]. In nonblind prospective studies performed by only one or two experienced endoscopists, microscopic incomplete polyp resection rate ranged from 8 to 38 % [8,10,11].…”
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.
“…Several recent studies examined microscopically the presence of residual lesions after CFP by observing specimens obtained immediately by biopsy or endoscopic mucosal resection of post-CFP ulcer edges. The incomplete resection rate ranged from 8 to 38 % [8][9][10][11]. Although these studies revealed a high rate of incomplete resection immediately after CFP of diminutive polyps, that does not necessarily mean that this rate is exactly the same as the real adenoma recurrence rate during follow-up because mechanical disruption of microvasculature and intercellular cohesiveness by CFP could theoretically lead to a loss of residual adenoma tissue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Those whose polyps were removed by any technique other than standard CFP were excluded. We also excluded those who had (1) 3 or more polyps; (2) polyps over 5 mm; (3) significant symptoms of colorectal disease (e.g., rectal bleeding); (4) colorectal examinations such as sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or barium enema within the previous 5 years; (5) a history of colorectal surgery or colorectal disease such as cancer or inflammatory bowel disease; (6) a history of colorectal cancer in first-degree relatives; (7) sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/P) removed; (8) colonoscopy that failed to reach the cecum; or (9) poor bowel preparation.…”
Section: Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the widespread use of standard CFP, there have been only a few studies of the clinical efficacy of this technique, and most of these raised concerns about incomplete polyp eradication [8][9][10][11]. In nonblind prospective studies performed by only one or two experienced endoscopists, microscopic incomplete polyp resection rate ranged from 8 to 38 % [8,10,11].…”
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.
“…Die aktuelle WHO-Definition (26) Die einzelnen Verfahren sind ausführlich in der S2k-Leitlinie der DGVS zu Qualiätsanforderungen der gastrointestinalen Endoskopie [415] diskutiert. Für kleine Polypen bis 5 mm wurde gezeigt, dass die Abtragung mit der Zange oft Adenomgewebe zurücklässt [521] und vermutlich abhängig von der Sorgfalt und der Biopsiezahl ist. Am besten ist die Kaltschlingenabtragung untersucht; sie ist wohl bei kleinen Polypen vorzuziehen [522 -524].…”
“…Efthymiou et al [18] demonstrated that diminutive polyps cannot be removed sufficiently with repeated cold biopsy. By applying endoscopic mucosal resection after repeated cold biopsies until no polyp tissue was visible, only 39% of the diminutive polyps were completely resected.…”
Section: How To Resect Small and Diminutive Polypsmentioning
Small (<10 mm) and diminutive (<6 mm) polyps harbour high-grade dysplasia or cancer in 0.3-5% of cases. The potential to grow and develop advanced histology is low. Traditional guidelines still recommend the removal of all polyps. Visual characterisation with modern endoscopic technology could enable us to leave diminutive hyperplastic polyps in situ and remove but discard small polyps. In expert hands, high-definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy can reach an accuracy of more than 90% in distinguishing between hyperplastic and adenomatous pathology. For less experienced endoscopists the values are lower and therefore the concept is not yet fit for routine use. Polyps can be removed completely with snares but not with forceps. The cold snaring technique in particular has proved safe and effective for small polyps. With more experience in the future a ‘cut and discard' strategy for small polyps and a ‘do not resect' strategy for diminutive polyps will save money and time to deal with more advanced lesions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.