Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Can Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Technique Be an Alternative Treatment Option for a Difficult Giant (=30 mm) Pedunculated Colorectal Polyp?

Choi, Yong Sung M.D.1; Lee, Jae Bum M.D.2; Lee, Eun-Jung M.D.2; Lee, Suk Hee M.D., Ph.D.3; Suh, Jung Pil M.D.1; Lee, Doo Han M.D., Ph.D.2; Kim, Do Sun M.D., Ph.D.2; Youk, Eui Gon M.D., Ph.D.2

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum: May 2013 - Volume 56 - Issue 5 - p 660–666
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e318276d2b9
Original Contribution: Endoscopy

BACKGROUND: Snare polypectomy of a giant pedunculated colorectal polyp is sometimes technically demanding, and, therefore, piecemeal resection is inevitable, despite the relative risk of invasive cancer and postpolypectomy bleeding.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection in comparison with conventional snare polypectomy for giant pedunculated polyps

DESIGN AND SETTINGS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes and complications of endoscopic polypectomy for giant pedunculated polyps from October 2006 to November 2011.

PATIENTS: All the patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (n = 23) or snare polypectomy (n = 20) for pedunculated polyps ≥3 cm were enrolled consecutively. In the case of a giant pedunculated polyp with 1) poor visualization of the stalk, 2) technical difficulties in snare positioning for en bloc resection, or 3) need for trimming of the head, we did not attempt piecemeal snare polypectomy, and we performed endoscopic submucosal dissection instead. (These were arbitrarily defined as “difficult” giant pedunculated polyps.)

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on the patient’s demography, endoscopic and histopathologic findings, clinical outcomes, and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS: Among the 43 giant pedunculated polyps, 23 polyps were defined as “difficult” polyps and were removed with endoscopic submucosal dissection. Subpedunculated (stalk <1 cm) type was more common in the “difficult” polyp group (p = 0.01). The overall incidence of cancer was 18.6% (8/43). En bloc resection rates were 100% (23/23) in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group and 90% (18/20) in the snare polypectomy group. The procedure times of snare polypectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection group did not differ significantly (41.7 ± 13.7 minutes vs 44.9 ± 35.6 minutes, p = 0.70). Postpolypectomy bleeding was noted in 1 case (4.3%) in the endoscopic submucosal dissection group and in 3 cases (15%) in the snare polypectomy group.

CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection, as well as the snare polypectomy for giant pedunculated polyps, appeared to be effective without major complications and can be an alternative option to achieve en bloc resection, particularly for difficult cases, such as giant subpedunculated polyps.

1Department of Gastroenterology, Daehang Hospital, Seoul, Korea

2Department of Surgery, Daehang Hospital, Seoul, Korea

3Department of Pathology, Daehang Hospital, Seoul, Korea

Financial Disclosures: None reported.

Poster presentation at the meeting of Digestive Disease Week, San Diego, CA, May 19 to 22, 2012.

Correspondence: Eui Gon Youk, M.D., PhD., Department of Surgery, Daehang Hospital, 481-10 Bangbae-3dong Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea 137–820. E-mail:

© The ASCRS 2013