Su Luo, Feng Xiong, Sheng-Gang Zhan, Zhenglei Xu, Ding-Guo Zhang, Ting-Ting Liu, Ying-Xue Li, Cheng Wei, Ben-Hua Wu, Yi-Teng Meng, Rui-Yue Shi, Jun Yao, Li-Sheng Wang, De-Feng Li
{"title":"三种电手术方式在内镜下粘膜切除10 ~ 20mm结肠直肠息肉的比较:随机对照试验。","authors":"Su Luo, Feng Xiong, Sheng-Gang Zhan, Zhenglei Xu, Ding-Guo Zhang, Ting-Ting Liu, Ying-Xue Li, Cheng Wei, Ben-Hua Wu, Yi-Teng Meng, Rui-Yue Shi, Jun Yao, Li-Sheng Wang, De-Feng Li","doi":"10.1055/a-2663-6177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) commonly is used for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) when removing colorectal polyps. However, there is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting of Endocut Q being recommended in clinical practice. We performed a randomized controlled trial to assess effectiveness and safety of three effects with EMR for removal of non-pedunculated 10- to 20-mm colorectal polyps.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients with non-pedunculate colorectal polyps undergoing EMR were randomly allocated into effect 2, effect 3, and effect 4 groups. The primary outcome was rates of intra-procedural bleeding. Secondary outcomes were rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, and residual polyps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2637 eligible patients were included in the study and randomly assigned into the effect 2, effect 3, or effect 4 group. There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics ( <i>P</i> > 0.05). In addition, no significant differences were observed in rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, residual polyps, or post-polypectomy syndrome ( <i>P</i> > 0.05). However, the rate of intra-procedural bleeding was significantly lower in the effect 2 group than in the effect 3 and effect 4 groups (4.0% vs. 12.2% vs. 12.7%, <i>P</i> < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) was effective and safe for removing 10- to 20-mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. However, effect 2 may be superior to effect 3 and effect 4 in reducing intra-procedural bleeding.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a26636177"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12418810/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of three electrosurgical modes for endoscopic mucosal resection of 10- to 20-mm colorectal polyps: Randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Su Luo, Feng Xiong, Sheng-Gang Zhan, Zhenglei Xu, Ding-Guo Zhang, Ting-Ting Liu, Ying-Xue Li, Cheng Wei, Ben-Hua Wu, Yi-Teng Meng, Rui-Yue Shi, Jun Yao, Li-Sheng Wang, De-Feng Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2663-6177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) commonly is used for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) when removing colorectal polyps. However, there is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting of Endocut Q being recommended in clinical practice. We performed a randomized controlled trial to assess effectiveness and safety of three effects with EMR for removal of non-pedunculated 10- to 20-mm colorectal polyps.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients with non-pedunculate colorectal polyps undergoing EMR were randomly allocated into effect 2, effect 3, and effect 4 groups. The primary outcome was rates of intra-procedural bleeding. Secondary outcomes were rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, and residual polyps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2637 eligible patients were included in the study and randomly assigned into the effect 2, effect 3, or effect 4 group. There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics ( <i>P</i> > 0.05). In addition, no significant differences were observed in rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, residual polyps, or post-polypectomy syndrome ( <i>P</i> > 0.05). However, the rate of intra-procedural bleeding was significantly lower in the effect 2 group than in the effect 3 and effect 4 groups (4.0% vs. 12.2% vs. 12.7%, <i>P</i> < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) was effective and safe for removing 10- to 20-mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. However, effect 2 may be superior to effect 3 and effect 4 in reducing intra-procedural bleeding.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"a26636177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12418810/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2663-6177\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2663-6177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of three electrosurgical modes for endoscopic mucosal resection of 10- to 20-mm colorectal polyps: Randomized controlled trial.
Background and study aims: Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) commonly is used for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) when removing colorectal polyps. However, there is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting of Endocut Q being recommended in clinical practice. We performed a randomized controlled trial to assess effectiveness and safety of three effects with EMR for removal of non-pedunculated 10- to 20-mm colorectal polyps.
Patients and methods: Patients with non-pedunculate colorectal polyps undergoing EMR were randomly allocated into effect 2, effect 3, and effect 4 groups. The primary outcome was rates of intra-procedural bleeding. Secondary outcomes were rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, and residual polyps.
Results: A total of 2637 eligible patients were included in the study and randomly assigned into the effect 2, effect 3, or effect 4 group. There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics ( P > 0.05). In addition, no significant differences were observed in rates of post-procedural bleeding, perforation, complete resection, en bloc resection, R0 resection, residual polyps, or post-polypectomy syndrome ( P > 0.05). However, the rate of intra-procedural bleeding was significantly lower in the effect 2 group than in the effect 3 and effect 4 groups (4.0% vs. 12.2% vs. 12.7%, P < 0.01).
Conclusions: Endocut Q (effect 2, effect 3 and effect 4) was effective and safe for removing 10- to 20-mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. However, effect 2 may be superior to effect 3 and effect 4 in reducing intra-procedural bleeding.