Wai Kah Choo1, Javaid Subhani. 1. Endoscopy Department, Basildon University Hospital, Nethermayne, Basildon SS 16 5NL, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colonic polypectomy reduces the subsequent rate of development of colonic cancer but is not without its risks. We aimed to examine our complication rates in relation to the characteristics of polyps and techniques employed. METHODS: A database for all colonic polypectomies performed over a 3½-year period between 2006 and 2009 was matched against all patients readmitted after an endoscopy. Serious complications post-polypectomy were defined as events leading to readmission within 14 days. RESULTS: We performed 2106 polypectomies on 1252 patients in this period. Fourteen patients or 24 (1.1%) polypectomies experienced complications. Two patients (0.09%) experienced perforation, 10 (0.47%) had bleeding and 3 (0.14%) had post-polypectomy syndromes. Our bleeding rate was 1:211, lower than the national standard of 1:100. No deaths were reported. Complication rates rose from 1% in the smallest group (1-10 mm) to 4.9% in the largest (>31 mm) but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.067). Right-colon polypectomies had a higher tendency of developing post-polypectomy syndrome and bleeding (p=0.002). Complication rates in snare polypectomies were not significantly different from that of hot biopsies (p=0.64). However, endoscopic mucosal resections (EMR) had significantly more complications compared to snares (p=0.045) and hot biopsies (p=0.026). CONCLUSION: We achieved lower bleeding rates than that published nationally. Hot biopsies did not carry a higher risk unlike EMRs. Although polyp size may be an important risk factor, statistical significance was not met. Ascending and transverse colon polypectomies carried the highest risks of complications.
BACKGROUND:Colonic polypectomy reduces the subsequent rate of development of colonic cancer but is not without its risks. We aimed to examine our complication rates in relation to the characteristics of polyps and techniques employed. METHODS: A database for all colonic polypectomies performed over a 3½-year period between 2006 and 2009 was matched against all patients readmitted after an endoscopy. Serious complications post-polypectomy were defined as events leading to readmission within 14 days. RESULTS: We performed 2106 polypectomies on 1252 patients in this period. Fourteen patients or 24 (1.1%) polypectomies experienced complications. Two patients (0.09%) experienced perforation, 10 (0.47%) had bleeding and 3 (0.14%) had post-polypectomy syndromes. Our bleeding rate was 1:211, lower than the national standard of 1:100. No deaths were reported. Complication rates rose from 1% in the smallest group (1-10 mm) to 4.9% in the largest (>31 mm) but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.067). Right-colon polypectomies had a higher tendency of developing post-polypectomy syndrome and bleeding (p=0.002). Complication rates in snare polypectomies were not significantly different from that of hot biopsies (p=0.64). However, endoscopic mucosal resections (EMR) had significantly more complications compared to snares (p=0.045) and hot biopsies (p=0.026). CONCLUSION: We achieved lower bleeding rates than that published nationally. Hot biopsies did not carry a higher risk unlike EMRs. Although polyp size may be an important risk factor, statistical significance was not met. Ascending and transverse colon polypectomies carried the highest risks of complications.
Authors: Klaus Mönkemüller; Helmut Neumann; Peter Malfertheiner; Lucia C Fry Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2009-03-10 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Theodore R Levin; Wei Zhao; Carol Conell; Laura C Seeff; Diane L Manninen; Jean A Shapiro; Jane Schulman Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-12-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Jim C Brooker; Brian P Saunders; Syed G Shah; Catherine J Thapar; Noriko Suzuki; Christopher B Williams Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Bernard Levin; David A Lieberman; Beth McFarland; Kimberly S Andrews; Durado Brooks; John Bond; Chiranjeev Dash; Francis M Giardiello; Seth Glick; David Johnson; C Daniel Johnson; Theodore R Levin; Perry J Pickhardt; Douglas K Rex; Robert A Smith; Alan Thorson; Sidney J Winawer Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-02-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-12-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R Manta; F Tremolaterra; A Arezzo; M Verra; G Galloro; L Dioscoridi; F Pugliese; A Zullo; M Mutignani; G Bassotti Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2015-07-11 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Colin J Rees; Roisin Bevan; Katharina Zimmermann-Fraedrich; Matthew D Rutter; Douglas Rex; Evelien Dekker; Thierry Ponchon; Michael Bretthauer; Jaroslaw Regula; Brian Saunders; Cesare Hassan; Michael J Bourke; Thomas Rösch Journal: Gut Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Dae Won Ma; Young Hoon Youn; Da Hyun Jung; Jae Jun Park; Jie-Hyun Kim; Hyojin Park Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 5.742