Literature DB >> 22196811

Randomized, controlled trial of standard, large-capacity versus jumbo biopsy forceps for polypectomy of small, sessile, colorectal polyps.

Peter V Draganov1, Myron N Chang, Ahmad Alkhasawneh, Lisa R Dixon, John Lieb, Baharak Moshiree, Steven Polyak, Shahnaz Sultan, Dennis Collins, Amitabh Suman, John F Valentine, Mihir S Wagh, Samir L Habashi, Chris E Forsmark.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Polypectomy with cold biopsy forceps is a frequently used technique for removal of small, sessile, colorectal polyps. Jumbo forceps may lead to more effective polypectomy because of the larger size of the forceps cup.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of cold jumbo biopsy forceps compared with standard forceps for polypectomy of small, sessile, colorectal polyps.
DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial.
SETTING: Outpatient endoscopy center. PATIENTS: This study involved 140 patients found to have at least one eligible polyp defined as a sessile polyp measuring ≤6 mm. INTERVENTION: Polypectomy with cold biopsy forceps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Complete visual polyp eradication with one forceps bite.
RESULTS: In 140 patients, a total of 305 eligible polyps were detected (151 removed with jumbo forceps and 154 with standard forceps). Complete visual eradication of the polyp with one forceps bite was achieved in 78.8% of the jumbo forceps group and 50.7% of the standard forceps group (P < .0001). Biopsies from the polypectomy sites of adenomatous polyps thought to be visually completely eradicated with one bite showed a trend toward a higher complete histologic eradication rate with the jumbo forceps (82.4%) compared with the standard forceps (77.4%), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .62). The withdrawal time for visual inspection of the colon and time to perform polypectomies were significantly shorter in the jumbo forceps group (mean 21.43 vs 18.23 minutes; P = .02). LIMITATIONS: Lack of blinding to the type of forceps used.
CONCLUSION: The jumbo biopsy forceps is superior to the standard forceps in removing small, sessile polyps. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00855790.).
Copyright © 2012 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22196811     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.08.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  26 in total

1.  Management and risk factors for incomplete resection associated with jumbo forceps polypectomy for diminutive colorectal polyps: a single-institution retrospective study.

Authors:  Naoki Asayama; Shinji Nagata; Kenjiro Shigita; Yutaro Ogawa; Hirosato Tamari; Taiki Aoyama; Akira Fukumoto; Shinichi Mukai; Mayumi Kaneko
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Safety of cold polypectomy for small colorectal neoplastic lesions: a prospective cohort study in Japan.

Authors:  Yuichi Shimodate; Motowo Mizuno; Rio Takezawa; Mami Kobayashi; Tatsuhiro Yamazaki; Akira Doi; Naoyuki Nishimura; Hirokazu Mouri; Kazuhiro Matsueda; Hiroshi Yamamoto
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Polypectomy practices of sub-centimeter polyps in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

Authors:  Said Din; Alex J Ball; Eleanor Taylor; Matthew Rutter; Stuart A Riley; Shawinder Johal
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Colonoscopy: Cold snaring diminutive polyps--the thinner the better!

Authors:  Cesare Hassan; Alessandro Repici
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 46.802

5.  Comparison of Performance Characteristics of Oval Cup Forceps Versus Serrated Jaw Forceps in Gastric Biopsy.

Authors:  Daniel A Sussman; Amar R Deshpande; Uday Shankar; Jodie A Barkin; Ana Maria Medina; Robert J Poppiti; Luigi X Cubeddu; Jamie S Barkin
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Efficacy and adverse events of cold vs hot polypectomy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mikihiro Fujiya; Hiroki Sato; Nobuhiro Ueno; Aki Sakatani; Kazuyuki Tanaka; Tatsuya Dokoshi; Shugo Fujibayashi; Yoshiki Nomura; Shin Kashima; Takuma Gotoh; Junpei Sasajima; Kentaro Moriichi; Jiro Watari; Yutaka Kohgo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  A prospective randomized study comparing jumbo biopsy forceps to cold snare for the resection of diminutive colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Shireena Desai; Samir Gupta; Nedret Copur-Dahi; Mary L Krinsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Advances in colonoscopy.

Authors:  Nicholas Tutticci; Michael J Bourke
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-06

9.  Comparative efficacy of cold polypectomy techniques for diminutive colorectal polyps: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yoon Suk Jung; Chan Hyuk Park; Eunwoo Nam; Chang Soo Eun; Dong Il Park; Dong Soo Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Treatment outcomes and recurrence following standard cold forceps polypectomy for diminutive polyps.

Authors:  Ho-Su Lee; Hye Won Park; Jong-Soo Lee; Jong Cheol Kim; Jaewon Choe; Jae Seung Soh; Seohyun Lee; Jung Ho Bae; Hyo Jeong Lee; Dong-Hoon Yang; Seung-Jae Myung; Suk-Kyun Yang; Hye-Sook Chang; Jeong-Sik Byeon
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.