Abstract:BACKGROUND: The optimal method to remove sessile colorectal lesions sized 10-20 mm remains uncertain. Piecemeal and incomplete resection are major limitations in current practice, such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and cold or hot snare polypectomy. Recently, EMR with circumferential precutting (EMR-P) has emerged as an effective technique, but the quality of current evidence in comparative studies of conventional EMR (CEMR) and EMR-P is limited.AIM: To investigate whether EMR-P is superior to CEMR in removing sessile colorectal polyps.METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial involved seven medical institutions in China. Patients with colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm were enrolled and randomly assigned to undergo EMR-P or CEMR. EMR-P was performed following submucosal injection, and a circumferential mucosa incision (precutting) was conducted using a snare tip. Primary outcomes included a comparison of the rates of en bloc and R0 resection, defined as one-piece resection and one-piece resection with histologically assessed clear margins, respectively.RESULTS: A total of 110 patients in the EMR-P group and 110 patients in the CEMR group were finally evaluated. In the per-protocol analysis, the proportion of en bloc resections was 94.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.2%-97.4%] in the EMR-P group and 86% (95%CI: 78.2%-91.3%) in the CEMR group (P = 0.041), while subgroup analysis showed that for lesions > 15 mm, EMR-P also resulted in a higher en bloc resection rate (92.0% vs 58.8% P = 0.029). The proportion of R0 resections was 81.1% (95%CI: 72.6%-87.4%) in the EMR-P group and 76.6% (95%CI: 68.8%-84.4%) in the CEMR group (P = 0.521). The EMR-P group showed a longer median procedure time (6.4 vs 3.0 min; P < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the proportion of patients with adverse events (EMR-P: 9.1%; CEMR: 6.4%; P = 0.449).CONCLUSION: In this study, EMR-P served as an alternative to CEMR for removing nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm, particularly polyps > 15 mm in diameter, with higher R0 and en bloc resection rates and without increasing adverse events. However, EMR-P required a relatively longer procedure time than CEMR. Considering its potential benefits for en bloc and R0 resection, EMR-P may be a promising technique in colorectal polyp resection.

Comparison of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection for small colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Using Cold Snare Versus Hot Snare in Treatment for 10–19 Mm Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: Protocol of a Non-Inferiority Randomised Controlled Study

Cold endoscopic mucosal resection versus cold snare polypectomy for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Endoscopic mucosal resection-precutting vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm

Efficacy and Safety of Cold Snare Polypectomy versus Cold Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Resecting 3–10 mm Colorectal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Endoscopic Mucosal Resectionvsendoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Rectal Carcinoid Tumours: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cold versus Hot Snare Endoscopic Resection of Large Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps (Randomized-controlled German CHRONICLE-trial)

Effect of cold snare polypectomy for small colorectal polyps.

Comparing endoscopic mucosal resection with endoscopic submucosal dissection: the different endoscopic techniques for colorectal tumors

Different endoscopic treatments for small colorectal polyps: A systematic review, pair-wise, and network meta-analysis

Clinical effects analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile and flat colorectal polyps

[A Comparative Study of Cold Snare and Hot Snare Resection of Small Colorectal Polyps].

Comparison of complete resection rates in cold snare polypectomy using two different wire diameter snares: A randomized controlled study

Histological Outcomes Between Hot and Cold Snare Polypectomy for Small Colorectal Polyps.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: A meta-analysis and meta-regression with single arm analysis

The efficacy and safety of cold snare versus hot snare polypectomy for endoscopic removal of small colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Comparison of Underwater vs Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Intermediate-Size Colorectal Polyps

Safety and efficacy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

A clinical study of cold snare resection for large colorectal polyps

Effectiveness of Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for 10 to 20 Mm Colorectal Polyps

Meta-analysis and systematic review of colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection