{"id":7020,"date":"2020-01-04T11:18:48","date_gmt":"2020-01-04T10:18:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/?post_type=ec-news&p=7020"},"modified":"2020-01-04T11:18:49","modified_gmt":"2020-01-04T10:18:49","slug":"endoscopic-resection-effective-for-ssps-%e2%89%a510-mm-in-meta-analysis-cold-emr-may-be-best","status":"publish","type":"ec-news","link":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/ec-news\/endoscopic-resection-effective-for-ssps-%e2%89%a510-mm-in-meta-analysis-cold-emr-may-be-best\/","title":{"rendered":"Endoscopic Resection Effective for SSPs \u226510 mm in Meta-analysis; Cold EMR May Be Best"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Douglas K. Rex, MD, FASGE reviewing Chandrasekar VT, et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019 Nov 28.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This systematic review and meta-analysis identified 911 patients with 1137 sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) \u226510 mm in 14 studies, in which resection was performed by hot EMR in 8 studies, hot EMR and a second technique in 2, cold EMR in 2, and standard snare resection in 1. Overall, technical success was 99.5%, with a rate of residual polyp at follow-up of 4.3%, which was related to lesion size: 5.9% for lesions \u226520 mm and 1.2% for 10- to 19-mm lesions. The perforation rate was 0.3%, and the overall delayed hemorrhage rate was 1.3%, but there were no delayed hemorrhages with cold EMR. Residual polyp rates were numerically lower with cold EMR. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

COMMENT
Given the limitations of a systematic review and meta-analysis, these data suggest that cold EMR is as effective as hot EMR for resection of SSPs \u226510 mm, yet safer. A direct comparison of hot and cold EMRs for serrated lesions is warranted.<\/p>

<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Note to readers: At the time we reviewed this paper, its publisher noted that it was not in final form and that subsequent changes might be made. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>
\n

Douglas K. Rex, MD, FASGE <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

CITATION(S) <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Chandrasekar VT, Aziz M, Patel HK, et al. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of sessile serrated polyps 10 mm or larger: a systematic review and meta-analysis: resection of sessile serrated polyps \u226510 mm.\u00a0Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol\u00a0<\/em>2019 Nov 28. (Epub ahead of print) (https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.cgh.2019.11.041<\/a>) <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Douglas K. Rex, MD, FASGE reviewing Chandrasekar VT, et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019 Nov 28. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified 911 patients with 1137 sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) \u226510 mm in 14 studies, in which resection was performed by hot EMR in 8 studies, hot EMR and a second technique in 2, cold … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","categories":[1768,1769],"tags":[1845,1844],"class_list":["post-7020","ec-news","type-ec-news","status-publish","hentry","category-asge-journal-scan","category-asge-kolon","tag-cold-emr","tag-hot-emr"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ec-news\/7020","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ec-news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/ec-news"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7020"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7020"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.endoscopy-campus.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7020"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}