Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Routine and Advanced Polypectomy Techniques

  • Published:
Current Gastroenterology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The performance of colon polypectomy has proven to be one of the most impactful services provided by today’s endoscopist. Advancements in instrumentation and endoscopic techniques have been studied intensely by endoscopists over the past decade in order to expand their extent of resection capabilities to large and complex polyps. Much of the research in the past year has focused on the safety and efficacy of performing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and combined laparascopic-endoscopic resections (CLER). Experts have published case-series, multicenter studies, and even nationwide results on the use of these methods for complex polypectomy. Because of the novelty and increased risk of these procedures, recent research has also focused on the prevention, identification and management of complications related to polypectomy, particularly bleeding and perforation. This manuscript will review the recent literature addressing basic and advanced colon polypectomy techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Fyock CJ, Draganov PV. Colonoscopic polypectomy and associated techniques. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16(29):3630–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gallegos-Orozco JF, Gurudu SR. Complex colon polypectomy. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2010;6(6):375–82.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lau PC, Sung JJ. Flat adenoma in colon: two decades of debate. J Dig Dis. 2010;11(4):201–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahlawat SK, Gupta N, Benjamin SB, et al. Large colorectal polyps: endoscopic management and rate of malignancy: does size matter? J Clin Gastroenterol. 2011;45(4):347–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Binmoeller KF, Bohnacker S, Seifert H, et al. Endoscopic snare excision of “giant” colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;43:183–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Conio M, Repici A, Demarquay J, et al. EMR of large sessile colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:234–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Heldwein W, Dollhop M, Rosch T, et al. The Munich Polypectomy Study (MUPS): prospective analysis of complications and risk factors in 4000 colonic snare polypectomies. Endoscopy. 2005;37:1116–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ferrara F, Luigiano C, Ghersi S, et al. Efficacy, safety and outcomes of 'inject and cut' endoscopic mucosal resection for large sessile and flat colorectal polyps. Digestion. 2010;82(4):213–20. Epub 2010 Jun 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Iambrenghi O, Ugenti I, Martines G, et al. Endoscopic management of large colorectal polyps. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24(7):749–53. Epub 2009 Mar 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Deprez PH, Bergman JJ, Meisner S, et al. Current practice with endoscopic submucosal dissection in Europe: position statement from a panel of experts. Endoscopy. 2010;42(10):853–8. Epub 2010 Jul 9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. • Heresbach D, Kornhauser R, Seyrig JA, et al.: A national survey of endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasia. Endoscopy. 2010 Oct;42(10):806–13. Epub 2010 Sep 6. EMR is effectively performed by non-polypectomy experts with results comparable to published literature and academic centers

  12. Oka S, Tanaka S, Kanao H, et al. Current status in the occurrence of postoperative bleeding, perforation and residual/local recurrence during colonoscopic treatment in Japan. Dig Endosc. 2010;22(4):376–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Neuhaus H. Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the West--too many concerns and caveats? Endoscopy. 2010;42(10):859–61. Epub 2010 Sep 30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hon SS, Ng SS, Lee JF, et al. In vitro porcine training model for colonic endoscopic submucosal dissection: an inexpensive and safe way to acquire a complex endoscopic technique. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(10):2439–43. Epub 2010 Mar 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hauenschild L, Bader FG, Laubert T, et al. Laparoscopic colorectal resection for benign polyps not suitable for endoscopic polypectomy. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24(7):755–9. Epub 2009 Mar 13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilhelm D, von Delius S, Weber L, et al. Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resections of colorectal polyps: 10-year experience and follow-up. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(4):688–93. Epub 2009 Jan 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grünhagen DJ, Van Ierland MC, Doomebosch PG, et al.: Laparoscopic-monitored colonoscopic polypectomy: a multimodality method to avoid segmental colon resection. Colorectal Dis. 2010 Nov 19.

  18. • Buddingh KT, Herngreen T, Haringsma J, et al.: Location in the Right Hemi-Colon Is an Independent Risk Factor for Delayed Post-Polypectomy Hemorrhage: A Multi-Center Case-Control Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Jan 25. The first publication specifically indicating that right-side polyps independently increase the risk for delayed post-polypectomy bleeding. Post-polypectomy prophylaxis with hemoclips merit investigation.

  19. Watabe H, Yamaji Y, Okamoto M, et al. Risk assessment for delayed hemorrhagic complication of colonic polypectomy: polyp-related factors and patient-related factors. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:73–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sawhney MS, Salfiti N, Nelson DB, et al. Risk factors for severe delayed postpolypectomy bleeding. Endoscopy. 2008;40:115–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Witt DM, Delate T, McCool KH, et al. Incidence and predictors of bleeding or thrombosis after polypectomy in patients receiving and not receiving anticoagulation therapy. J Thromb Haemost. 2009;7(12):1982–9. Epub 2009 Aug 28.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. •• Swan MP, Bourke MJ, Moss A, et al. The target sign: an endoscopic marker for the resection of the muscularis propria and potential perforation during colonic endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73(1):79–85. First description of an endoscopic predictor of deep resection or perforation. Recognition of the ‘target sign’ can prevent need for surgical management.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. •• Panteris V, Haringsma J, Kuipers EJ: Colonoscopy perforation rate, mechanisms and outcome: from diagnostic to therapeutic colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2009 Nov;41(11):941–51. Epub 2009 Oct 28. Determination that perforation rates from therapeutic colonoscopy have decreased in recent years, compared to previously published data. Advanced polypectomy is relatively safe in community practice.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mount Sinai Hospital, Division of Gastroenterology, 1501 Lexington Avenue, Apt 8F, New York, NY, 10029, USA

    Prashant Kedia

  2. Mount Sinai Hospital, Division of Gastroenterology, 650 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Jerome D. Waye

Authors
  1. Prashant Kedia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jerome D. Waye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jerome D. Waye.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kedia, P., Waye, J.D. Routine and Advanced Polypectomy Techniques. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 13, 506–511 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-011-0210-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-011-0210-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation