Colorectal polyps: underwater resection tops conventional approach

  • Yamashina T & al.
  • Gastroenterology
  • 11 Apr 2019

  • curated by Jim Kling
  • Univadis Clinical Summaries
Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals. Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals.

Takeaway

  • Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) led to a greater frequency of R0 resection of 10-20-mm sessile colorectal lesions compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR), with no significant difference in adverse events or procedure time.

Why this matters

  • The study is the first randomized controlled trial to compare UEMR and CEMR.

Study design

  • 211 patients with 214 polyps, at 5 institutions in Japan, were randomly assigned to UEMR or CEMR.
  • Funding: None.

Key results

  • The UEMR group had a higher R0 resection rate (69% vs 50%; P=.011) and a higher en bloc resection rate (89% vs 75%; P=.007).
  • There was no significant difference in median procedure times (165 vs 175 seconds; P=.629).
  • There were no incidents of intraprocedural hemorrhage requiring transfusion, interventional radiology, or surgery.
  • 2 patients in the CEMR group and 3 in the UEMR group experienced delayed bleeding from the treatment site within 48 hours of the procedure.
  • There were no significant differences in adverse events between the 2 groups.
  • A subset analysis showed that UEMR performed best for lesions 15 mm or higher (P=.016).

Limitations

  • Recurrence rate was not evaluated.
  • Endoscopists were not blinded.

Please confirm your acceptance

To gain full access to GPnotebook please confirm:

By submitting here you confirm that you have accepted Terms of Use and Privacy Policy of GPnotebook.

Submit