Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Different modalities are employed to remove small colonic polyps which potentially harbour a cancer risk. But, they can all vary in their completeness of removal, safety and the histological quality and the gold standard technique has yet to be defined. A novel suction pseudopolyp technique has been described by Patullo et al and in their prospective study, 126 polyps measuring less than 10mm flat or sessile were removed by this method with 100% complete endoscopic resection and without any immediate or delayed complications. The aim of the investigators study is to compare this technique with the standard cold snare technique. Patients attending for a routine colonoscopy and found to have polyps measuring 37mm in size will be eligible and they will be randomised to the polypectomy technique. Patient demographics and polyp characteristics will be recorded. The primary outcome measured will be the macroscopic resection rate. The secondary outcome measures are abdominal pain, tenderness, bleeding and fever.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| conventional cold snare polypectomy | Active Comparator | conventional cold snare polypectomy |
|
| Cold snare polypectomy with suction | Experimental | Cold snare polypectomy with suction |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| conventional cold snare polypectomy | Procedure | conventional cold snare polypectomy |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Complete macroscopic polyp eradication rate | The primary outcome for this study is the polypectomy completion rate. This will be assessed both macroscopically and histologically. The analysis for statistical difference between the 2 techniques and abdominal symptoms will be compared by the Chi2 test for categorical data. | At time of polypectomy intervention |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Shawinder Johal, MBChB, PhD, MRCP | Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust | Sheffield | South Yorkshire | S5 7AU | United Kingdom |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26165735 | Derived | Din S, Ball AJ, Riley SA, Kitsanta P, Johal S. A randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy versus a suction pseudopolyp technique. Endoscopy. 2015 Nov;47(11):1005-10. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1392533. Epub 2015 Jul 10. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007414 | Intestinal Neoplasms |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005770 | Gastrointestinal Neoplasms |
| D004067 | Digestive System Neoplasms |
| D009371 | Neoplasms by Site |
| D009369 | Neoplasms |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013396 | Suction |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D004322 | Drainage |
| D013514 | Surgical Procedures, Operative |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Cold snare polypectomy with suction | Procedure | Cold snare polypectomy with suction |
|
| D004066 |
| Digestive System Diseases |
| D005767 | Gastrointestinal Diseases |
| D007410 | Intestinal Diseases |