Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 7, 2022; 28(45): 6397-6409
Published online Dec 7, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i45.6397
Published online Dec 7, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i45.6397
Endoscopic mucosal resection-precutting vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for sessile colorectal polyps sized 10-20 mm
Xue-Qun Zhang, Bo Li, Chao-Hui Yu, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China
Jian-Zhong Sang, Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Yuyao City, Yuyao 315499, Zhejiang Province, China
Lei Xu, Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo First Hospital, Ningbo 315010, Zhejiang Province, China
Xin-Li Mao, Department of Gastroenterology, Taizhou Hospital, Taizhou 317099, Zhejiang Province, China
Wan-Lin Zhu, Department of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Lishui City, Lishui 323020, Zhejiang Province, China
Xiao-Yun Yang, Department of Gastroenterology, Jinhua Municipal Central Hospital, Jinhua 321099, Zhejiang Province, China
Author contributions: Zhang XQ, Xu L, and Yu CH designed the research; Zhang XQ, Sang JZ, Xu L, Mao XL, Li B, Zhu WL, and Yang XY participated in the operation; Zhang XQ and Xu L analyzed the data; Zhang XQ wrote the paper.
Institutional review board statement: The study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University (No. 20191477); Ningbo First Hospital, Zhejiang (No. 2020-R013) and other participating institutions.
Clinical trial registration statement: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The registration identification number is NCT04191473.
Informed consent statement: All study participants, or their legal guardian, provided informed written consent prior to study enrollment.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Data sharing statement: Technical appendix, statistical code, and dataset are available from the corresponding author at zhangxuequn@zju.edu.cn. Participants gave informed consent for data sharing.
CONSORT 2010 statement: The authors have read the CONSORT 2010 statement, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the CONSORT 2010 statement.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Chao-Hui Yu, MD, PhD, Chief Doctor, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No. 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China. zyyyych@zju.edu.cn
Received: July 30, 2022
Peer-review started: July 30, 2022
First decision: September 2, 2022
Revised: September 14, 2022
Accepted: October 19, 2022
Article in press: October 19, 2022
Published online: December 7, 2022
Processing time: 125 Days and 0.9 Hours
Peer-review started: July 30, 2022
First decision: September 2, 2022
Revised: September 14, 2022
Accepted: October 19, 2022
Article in press: October 19, 2022
Published online: December 7, 2022
Processing time: 125 Days and 0.9 Hours
Core Tip
Core Tip: The optimal method for removal of sessile colorectal lesions sized 10-20 mm remains uncertain. Piecemeal and incomplete resection are major limitations of conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) in removing sessile colorectal polyps. In this study, we found that endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential precutting achieved better en bloc resection (94.3% vs 86.0%; P = 0.041) with no increase in adverse events, and can serve as an alternative technique to CEMR in the removal of sessile colorectal lesions sized 10-20 mm.