Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 94262925.8.0000.5440 | Other Identifier | Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital das ClÃnicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto |
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
The objective of this retrospective cohort observational study is to identify variables related to the recurrence of colorectal lesions after snare polypectomy resection in colonoscopies. It also aims to evaluate the safety of the procedure. The main questions to be answered are:
The researchers will perform a chart analysis looking for demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histological variables in order to identify which factors are most closely linked to the recurrence of previously resected lesions.
Scientific Basis Endoscopic resection represents one of the main strategies for preventing colorectal cancer, significantly reducing the incidence and mortality associated with the disease. Snare polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy (cold snare or hot snare), is widely used in clinical practice due to its efficacy, applicability, and favorable safety profile.
However, despite the high initial success rate, local recurrence at the resection site remains a relevant clinical outcome, especially in larger lesions, piecemeal resections, and cases with advanced histological characteristics. The literature shows heterogeneity regarding independent predictors of recurrence, particularly when analyzed using time-to-event methodology.
Given this scenario, it becomes essential to identify clinical, endoscopic, and histopathological variables associated with local recurrence, allowing for better risk stratification and optimization of surveillance protocols.
Objectives
Primary Objective:
To identify variables associated with local recurrence after loop colorectal polypectomy.
Secondary Objectives:
To evaluate the occurrence of metachronous adenomas; To assess the safety of the procedure through the analysis of related adverse events; To determine independent predictors of recurrence using time-to-event analysis;
Study Design Type: Retrospective observational cohort. Analytical model: Longitudinal study with time-to-event analysis. Center: Tertiary referral center. Inclusion period: 2023 to 2025. Sample: 255 consecutive adult patients. Essential criterion: Undergoing at least one surveillance colonoscopy after initial polypectomy.
Study Population
Inclusion Criteria:
Patients ≥18 years; Underwent snare colorectal polypectomy (with or without thermal energy); Availability of histopathological examination; At least one documented follow-up colonoscopy;
Exclusion Criteria:
Resection by non-loop-based techniques (e.g., isolated ESD); Absence of endoscopic follow-up; Incomplete clinical or histological data;
Characterization of the Lesions
The lesions were described according to:
Size: dichotomized into
Resection technique:
Histopathology:
Outcomes 6.1 Primary Outcome Local recurrence, defined as endoscopic identification and histological confirmation of neoplastic tissue at the site of previous resection during surveillance colonoscopy.
6.2 Secondary Outcomes Metachronous adenoma: development of a new lesion at a site distinct from the initial resection.
Adverse events related to the procedure, including:
Data Collection
The following variables were collected:
7.1 Clinical
7.2 Endoscopic
7.3 Histological
Statistical Analysis
Relevant Methodological Aspects Consecutive inclusion to reduce selection bias. Standardization of endoscopic reports. Histopathological review according to institutional criteria. Objective definition of recurrence (histological confirmation).
Expected Impact
This study will allow:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Local recurrence of the lesion at the site of the previous resection | Presence of a visible lesion at the scar site of a previous polypectomy, histologically confirmed as adenomatous, serrated, or neoplastic tissue, obtained by biopsy or new resection. | Between the years 2023 and 2025. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Presence of metachronous adenoma | Development of a new adenomatous or serrated lesion at a site different from the area of previous resection, identified during follow-up colonoscopy and confirmed histologically. | Between the years 2023 and 2025. |
| Adverse events related to the procedure |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The study population consisted of 255 consecutive adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent loop colorectal polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy, at a tertiary referral center between 2023 and 2025. Only individuals with available histopathological examination of the resected lesion and who had undergone at least one documented surveillance colonoscopy, allowing evaluation of the previous resection site, were included. Patients who underwent advanced non-loop-based techniques, those without endoscopic follow-up, and cases with incomplete clinical or histological data were excluded, ensuring methodological homogeneity and adequate measurement of outcomes.
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospital das ClÃnicas of Ribeirão Preto Medical School | Ribeirão Preto | São Paulo | 14048-900 | Brazil |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35026166 | Result | Mohapatra S, Fukami N. Prevention of bleeding after EMR of colorectal lesions: when and how? Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Feb;7(2):109-110. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00463-5. No abstract available. | |
| 35765907 | Result | Albeniz E, Montori S, Rodriguez de Santiago E, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Alvarez MA, Estremera-Arevalo F, Pohl H. Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022 Jul 1;117(7):1080-1088. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001819. Epub 2022 May 4. |
Not provided
Not provided
The individual patient data included in this study will not be shared with other researchers, as it contains sensitive clinical information obtained through medical record review and is protected by ethical and legal standards of confidentiality and data protection. Even after anonymization, sharing could represent a residual risk of re-identification, especially since it is a sample from a single center with specific clinical characteristics. Therefore, the restriction on external sharing aims to guarantee the privacy of participants, compliance with the guidelines of the Research Ethics Committee, and conformity with current data protection legislation.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Feb 23, 2026 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Complications attributable to snare polypectomy, classified as: immediate bleeding; delayed bleeding; perforation; post-polypectomy syndrome (when applicable); and need for hospitalization or surgical intervention. |
| Between the years 2023 and 2025. |
| 32898199 | Result | Mack A, Mangira D, Moss A. Prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding: Should we amend the 2017 ESGE Guideline? Endosc Int Open. 2020 Sep;8(9):E1111-E1114. doi: 10.1055/a-1196-1602. Epub 2020 Aug 31. No abstract available. |
| 24090728 | Result | Burgess NG, Metz AJ, Williams SJ, Singh R, Tam W, Hourigan LF, Zanati SA, Brown GJ, Sonson R, Bourke MJ. Risk factors for intraprocedural and clinically significant delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Apr;12(4):651-61.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.09.049. Epub 2013 Oct 1. |
| 21392504 | Result | Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF, Brown G, Tam W, Singh R, Zanati S, Chen RY, Byth K. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2011 Jun;140(7):1909-18. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.062. Epub 2011 Mar 8. |
| 27005802 | Result | Facciorusso A, Di Maso M, Serviddio G, Vendemiale G, Spada C, Costamagna G, Muscatiello N. Factors Associated With Recurrence of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma After Endoscopic Resection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Aug;14(8):1148-1154.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.017. Epub 2016 Mar 19. |
| 37390864 | Result | Andrisani G, Hassan C, Pizzicannella M, Pugliese F, Mutignani M, Campanale C, Valerii G, Barbera C, Antonelli G, Di Matteo FM. Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for challenging colorectal lesions: a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2023 Dec;98(6):987-997.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2023.06.009. Epub 2023 Jun 28. |
| 40584488 | Result | Le QD, Le NQ, Quach DT. Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal neoplasms: A randomized controlled trial. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Jun 27;17(6):103635. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i6.103635. |
| 32122632 | Result | Kaltenbach T, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Gupta S, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Endoscopic Removal of Colorectal Lesions-Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020 Mar;158(4):1095-1129. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.018. Epub 2020 Feb 11. No abstract available. |
| 28494577 | Result | Ma MX, Bourke MJ. Sessile Serrated Adenomas: How to Detect, Characterize and Resect. Gut Liver. 2017 Nov 15;11(6):747-760. doi: 10.5009/gnl16523. |
| 36377124 | Result | von Renteln D, Djinbachian R, Benard F, Barkun AN, Bouin M, Bouchard S, Deslandres E, Panzini B, Sidani S, Leduc R, Jobse BC, Pohl H. Incomplete resection of colorectal polyps of 4-20 mm in size when using a cold snare, and its associated factors. Endoscopy. 2023 Oct;55(10):929-937. doi: 10.1055/a-1978-3277. Epub 2022 Nov 14. |
| 36262518 | Result | Kandel P, Hussain M, Yadav D, Dhungana SK, Brahmbhatt B, Raimondo M, Lukens FJ, Bachuwa G, Wallace MB. Post-EMR for colorectal polyps, thermal ablation of defects reduces adenoma recurrence: A meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2022 Oct 17;10(10):E1399-E1405. doi: 10.1055/a-1922-7646. eCollection 2022 Oct. |
| 26171439 | Result | Makazu M, Sakamoto T, So E, Otake Y, Nakajima T, Matsuda T, Kushima R, Saito Y. Relationship between indeterminate or positive lateral margin and local recurrence after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Endosc Int Open. 2015 Jun;3(3):E252-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1391853. Epub 2015 May 5. |
| 41297736 | Result | Gupta S, Demb J, Qin J, Earles A, Lamm M, Doubeni CA, Martinez ME, Kaltenbach TR, Gawron AJ, Shah SC, Messer K, Liu L. Impact of Guideline-Concordant Post-Polypectomy Colonoscopy Surveillance on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2026 Jun;24(6):1709-1719. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2025.11.012. Epub 2025 Nov 24. |
| 39139219 | Result | Sadowski DC, Kolber MR, Gomes A, Hickle L, Hilsden R, McLean DR, Mok D, Moysey B, Nemecek N, Ryan JD, Sultanian R, Wiseman J, Yang H. Post-polypectomy surveillance: follow-up recommendations from the Alberta Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. 2024 Mar 19;7(4):319-328. doi: 10.1093/jcag/gwae007. eCollection 2024 Aug. |
| 28779355 | Result | Jaruvongvanich V, Prasitlumkum N, Assavapongpaiboon B, Suchartlikitwong S, Sanguankeo A, Upala S. Risk factors for delayed colonic post-polypectomy bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 Oct;32(10):1399-1406. doi: 10.1007/s00384-017-2870-0. Epub 2017 Aug 5. |
| 32584409 | Result | Causada-Calo N, Bishay K, Albashir S, Al Mazroui A, Armstrong D. Association Between Age and Complications After Outpatient Colonoscopy. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jun 1;3(6):e208958. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.8958. |
| 32477640 | Result | Harrington LX, Wei JW, Suriawinata AA, Mackenzie TA, Hassanpour S. Predicting colorectal polyp recurrence using time-to-event analysis of medical records. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2020 May 30;2020:211-220. eCollection 2020. |
| 27908600 | Result | Tate DJ, Desomer L, Klein A, Brown G, Hourigan LF, Lee EY, Moss A, Ormonde D, Raftopoulos S, Singh R, Williams SJ, Zanati S, Byth K, Bourke MJ. Adenoma recurrence after piecemeal colonic EMR is predictable: the Sydney EMR recurrence tool. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Mar;85(3):647-656.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.027. Epub 2016 Nov 28. |
| 36549471 | Result | Baile-Maxia S, Mangas-Sanjuan C, Ladabaum U, Hassan C, Rutter MD, Bretthauer M, Medina-Prado L, Sala-Miquel N, Pomares OM, Zapater P, Jover R. Risk Factors for Metachronous Colorectal Cancer or Advanced Adenomas After Endoscopic Resection of High-risk Adenomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Mar;21(3):630-643. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.12.005. Epub 2022 Dec 20. |
| 24671869 | Result | Belderbos TD, Leenders M, Moons LM, Siersema PD. Local recurrence after endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2014 May;46(5):388-402. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1364970. Epub 2014 Mar 26. |
| 32572858 | Result | Hassan C, Antonelli G, Dumonceau JM, Regula J, Bretthauer M, Chaussade S, Dekker E, Ferlitsch M, Gimeno-Garcia A, Jover R, Kalager M, Pellise M, Pox C, Ricciardiello L, Rutter M, Helsingen LM, Bleijenberg A, Senore C, van Hooft JE, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Quintero E. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2020. Endoscopy. 2020 Aug;52(8):687-700. doi: 10.1055/a-1185-3109. Epub 2020 Jun 22. |
| 32044092 | Result | Gupta S, Lieberman D, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Recommendations for Follow-Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: A Consensus Update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020 Mar;158(4):1131-1153.e5. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.026. Epub 2020 Feb 7. No abstract available. |
| 38670139 | Result | Ferlitsch M, Hassan C, Bisschops R, Bhandari P, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Risio M, Paspatis GA, Moss A, Libanio D, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Voiosu AM, Rutter MD, Pellise M, Moons LMG, Probst A, Awadie H, Amato A, Takeuchi Y, Repici A, Rahmi G, Koecklin HU, Albeniz E, Rockenbauer LM, Waldmann E, Messmann H, Triantafyllou K, Jover R, Gralnek IM, Dekker E, Bourke MJ. Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2024. Endoscopy. 2024 Jul;56(7):516-545. doi: 10.1055/a-2304-3219. Epub 2024 Apr 26. |
| 39071460 | Result | Liao Z, Guo JT, Yang F, Wang SP, Sun SY. Screening of colorectal cancer: Methods and strategies. World J Clin Oncol. 2024 Jul 24;15(7):799-805. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v15.i7.799. |
| 31323292 | Result | Crockett SD, Nagtegaal ID. Terminology, Molecular Features, Epidemiology, and Management of Serrated Colorectal Neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2019 Oct;157(4):949-966.e4. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.041. Epub 2019 Jul 16. |
| 31631858 | Result | Dekker E, Tanis PJ, Vleugels JLA, Kasi PM, Wallace MB. Colorectal cancer. Lancet. 2019 Oct 19;394(10207):1467-1480. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32319-0. |
| Feb 24, 2026 |
| Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003110 | Colonic Neoplasms |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D015179 | Colorectal Neoplasms |
| D007414 | Intestinal Neoplasms |
| D005770 | Gastrointestinal Neoplasms |
| D004067 | Digestive System Neoplasms |
| D009371 | Neoplasms by Site |
| D009369 | Neoplasms |
| D004066 | Digestive System Diseases |
| D005767 | Gastrointestinal Diseases |
| D003108 | Colonic Diseases |
| D007410 | Intestinal Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided