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.

S1527 General versus Interventional Gastroenterologists: Comparative Analysis of Follow-Up Outcomes for Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Colorectal Polyps

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

S408 Predictors for No-Show After Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Colorectal Polyps: Insights from a Retrospective Veterans Affairs Study

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

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

A30 RECURRENCE RATES AFTER ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION OF LARGE COLORECTAL POLYPS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Long-term outcomes for Advanced Colorectal Polyps in the BowelScreen Programme

Comparing endoscopic mucosal resection with endoscopic submucosal dissection in colorectal adenoma and tumors: Meta-analysis and system review

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of large distal non-pedunculated colorectal adenomas

Combined endoscopic mucosal resection and full-thickness resection for large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rates of Recurrent Intestinal Metaplasia and Dysplasia After Successful Endoscopic Therapy of Barrett's Neoplasia by EMR vs ESD and Ablation: A Large North American Multicenter Cohort

Ten-year follow-up of endoscopic mucosal resection versus esophagectomy for esophageal intramucosal adenocarcinoma in the setting of Barrett's esophagus: a Canadian experience

Recurrence rates after endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis

S1621 Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) vs Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) for Early Gastric Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparative outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection for laterally spreading lesions in inflammatory bowel disease

Outcomes and adverse factors for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of colorectal polyps in elderly patients

Impact of margin thermal ablation after endoscopic mucosal resection of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colonic polyps on long-term recurrence

Long-Term Clinical Efficacy and Perioperative Safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Early Gastric Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Complex Colorectal Lesions

Clinical features and prognosis of early colorectal cancer treated by endoscopic mucosal resection

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