Article

Risk Factors for Intraprocedural and Clinically Significant Delayed Bleeding After Wide-Field Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Large Colonic Lesions.

Departments of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Sydney at Westmead Hospital, Sydney, NSW
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association (Impact Factor: 6.53). 09/2013; 12(4). DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.09.049
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT & Aims: Wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection (WF-EMR) of large sessile colonic polyps is a safe and cost-effective outpatient treatment. Bleeding is the main complication. Few studies have examined risk factors for bleeding during the procedure (intraprocedural bleeding, IPB) or following it (clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, CSPEB). We investigated factors associated with IPB and CSPEB in a large prospective study.
We analyzed data from WF-EMRs of sessile colorectal polyps ≥20 mm in size (mean size, 35.5mm), performed on 1172 patients (mean age 67.8 y) from June 2008 through March 2013 at 7 tertiary hospitals as part of the Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection Study. Data were collected on characteristics of patients and lesions, along with outcomes of procedures and clinical and histologic analyses. Independent predictors of IPB and CSPEB were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis.
Of the patients studied, 133 had IPB (11.3%). Independent predictors included increasing lesion size (odds ratio [OR], 1.24/10 mm; P <.001), Paris endoscopic classification of 0-IIa+Is (OR, 2.12; P=.004), tubulovillous or villous histology (OR, 1.84; P=.007), and study institutions that performed the procedure on fewer than 75 patients (OR, 3.78; P <.001). All IPB was successfully controlled endoscopically. IPB prolonged procedures and was associated with early recurrence (relative risk, 1.68; P=.011). Seventy-three patients had CSPEB (6.2%). On multivariable analysis, CSPEB was associated with proximal colon location (OR, 3.72; P <.001), use of an electrosurgical current not controlled by a microprocessor (OR, 2.03; P=.038) and IPB (OR, 2.16; P=.016). Lesion size and comorbidities did not predict CSPEB.
In a prospective study of patients undergoing WF-EMR of large sessile colonic polyps, IPB is associated with larger lesions, lesion histology, and Paris endoscopic classification of type 0-IIa+Is. IBP prolongs the duration of the procedure, is a marker for recurrence, and is associated with CSPEB. CSPEB occurs most frequently in the proximal colon and less when current is controlled by a microprocessor.

1 Follower
 · 
119 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bleeding is a relatively rare complication occurring mainly after snare polypectomy. The majority of cases can be managed successfully by endoscopic means leaving very few cases which will ultimately need an operation. Colonic perforation, on the other hand is a serious complication that requires intensive and careful management. Prompt recognition of the perforation during the procedure allows, in selected cases, immediate endoscopic closure with an uneventful and full recovery followed by close monitoring and surgical management in case of clinical deterioration. The criteria for the right selection of perforation cases amenable to endoscopic treatment do still need to be confirmed by prospective studies and further experience is required before a standard algorithm on the endoscopic management of perforations is developed.
    Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 05/2014; 8(8):1-10. DOI:10.1586/17474124.2014.925797 · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: EMR of advanced mucosal neoplasia (AMN) (ie, sessile or laterally spreading lesions of ≥20 mm) of the colon has become an increasingly popular alternative to surgical resection. However, data regarding safety and mortality of EMR in comparison to surgery are limited.
    Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 06/2014; 80(4). DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.015 · 4.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute gastrointestinal bleeding is among the most urgent situations in daily gastroenterological practise. Endoscopy plays a key role in the diagnosis and treatment of such cases. Endoscopic haemostasis is probably the most important technical challenge that must be mastered by gastroenterologists. It is essential for both the management of acute gastrointestinal haemorrhage and the prevention of bleeding during high-risk endoscopic procedures. During the last decade, endoscopic haemostasis techniques and tools have grown in parallel with the number of devices available for endotherapy. Haemostatic powders, over-the-scope clips, haemostatic forceps, and other emerging technologies have changed daily practise and complement the standard available armamentarium (injectable, thermal, and mechanical therapy). Although there is a lack of strong evidence-based information on these procedures because of the difficulty in designing statistically powerful trials on this topic, physicians must be aware of all available devices to be able to choose the best haemostatic tool for the most effective procedure. We herein present an overview of procedures and clinical scenarios to optimise the management of gastrointestinal bleeding in daily practise.
    Digestive and Liver Disease 09/2014; 46(9). DOI:10.1016/j.dld.2014.05.008 · 2.89 Impact Factor