- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Mackenzie, Todd A."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Clip Closure Does Not Reduce Risk of Bleeding After Resection of Large Serrated Polyps: Results From a Randomized Trial(Elsevier, 2021-12) Crockett, Seth D.; Khashab, Mouen; Rex, Douglas K.; Grimm, Ian S.; Moyer, Matthew T.; Rastogi, Amit; Mackenzie, Todd A.; Pohl, Heiko; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground & Aims Serrated polyps are important colorectal cancer precursors and are most commonly located in the proximal colon, where post-polypectomy bleeding rates are higher. There is limited clinical trial evidence to guide best practices for resection of large serrated polyps (LSPs). Methods In a multicenter trial, patients with large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated polyps undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) were randomized to clipping of the resection base or no clipping. This analysis is stratified by histologic subtype of study polyp(s), categorized as serrated [sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) or hyperplastic polyps (HPs)] or adenomatous, comparing clip vs control groups. The primary outcome was severe post-procedure bleeding within 30 days of colonoscopy. Results A total of 179 participants with 199 LSPs (191 SSLs and 8 HPs) and 730 participants with 771 adenomatous polyps were included in the study. Overall, 5 patients with LSPs (2.8%) experienced post-procedure bleeding compared with 42 (5.8%) of those with adenomas. There was no difference in post-procedure bleeding rates between patients in the clip vs control group among those with LSPs (2.3% vs 3.3%, respectively, difference 1.0%; P = NS). However, among those with adenomatous polyps, clipping was associated with a lower risk of post-procedure bleeding (3.9% vs 7.6%, difference 3.7%; P = .03) and overall serious adverse events (5.5% vs 10.6%, difference 5.1%; P = .01). Conclusion The post-procedure bleeding risk for LSPs removed via EMR is low, and there is no discernable benefit of prophylactic clipping of the resection base in this group. This study indicates that the benefit of endoscopic clipping following EMR may be specific for >2 cm adenomatous polyps located in the proximal colon. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT01936948.Item Clip Closure Prevents Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Large Colon Polyps in a Randomized Trial(Elsevier, 2019-10) Pohl, Heiko; Grimm, Ian S.; Moyer, Matthew T.; Hasan, Muhammad K.; Pleskow, Douglas; Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Khashab, Mouen A.; Sanaei, Omid; Al-Kawas, Firas H.; Gordon, Stuart R.; Mathew, Abraham; Levenick, John M.; Aslanian, Harry R.; Antaki, Fadi; von Renteln, Daniel; Crockett, Seth D.; Rastogi, Amit; Gill, Jeffrey A.; Law, Ryan J.; Elias, Pooja A.; Pellise, Maria; Wallace, Michael B.; Mackenzie, Todd A.; Rex, Douglas K.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground & aims: Bleeding is the most common severe complication after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colon polyps and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. We examined whether prophylactic closure of the mucosal defect with hemoclips after polyp resection reduces the risk of bleeding. Methods: We performed a multicenter, randomized trial of patients with a large nonpedunculated colon polyp (≥20 mm) at 18 medical centers in North America and Spain from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic closure with a clip (clip group) or no closure (control group) and followed. The primary outcome, postprocedure bleeding, was defined as a severe bleeding event that required hospitalization, a blood transfusion, colonoscopy, surgery, or another invasive intervention within 30 days after completion of the colonoscopy. Subgroup analyses included postprocedure bleeding with polyp location, polyp size, or use of periprocedural antithrombotic medications. We also examined the risk of any serious adverse event. Results: A total of 919 patients were randomly assigned to groups and completed follow-up. Postprocedure bleeding occurred in 3.5% of patients in the clip group and 7.1% in the control group (absolute risk difference [ARD] 3.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7%-6.5%). Among 615 patients (66.9%) with a proximal large polyp, the risk of bleeding in the clip group was 3.3% and in the control group was 9.6% (ARD 6.3%; 95% CI 2.5%-10.1%); among patients with a distal large polyp, the risks were 4.0% in the clip group and 1.4% in the control group (ARD -2.6%; 95% CI -6.3% to -1.1%). The effect of clip closure was independent of antithrombotic medications or polyp size. Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% of patients in the clip group and 9.5% of patients in the control group (ARD 4.6%; 95% CI 1.3%-8.0%). Conclusions: In a randomized trial, we found that endoscopic clip closure of the mucosal defect following resection of large colon polyps reduces risk of postprocedure bleeding. The protective effect appeared to be restricted to large polyps located in the proximal colon.Item Effects of Blended (Yellow) vs Forced Coagulation (Blue) Currents on Adverse Events, Complete Resection, or Polyp Recurrence After Polypectomy in a Large Randomized Trial(Elsevier, 2020-07) Pohl, Heiko; Grimm, Ian S.; Moyer, Matthew T.; Hasan, Muhammad K.; Pleskow, Douglas; Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Khashab, Mouen A.; Sanaei, Omid; Al-Kawas, Firas H.; Gordon, Stuart R.; Mathew, Abraham; Levenick, John M.; Aslanian, Harry R.; Antaki, Fadi; von Renteln, Daniel; Crockett, Seth D.; Rastogi, Amit; Gill, Jeffrey A.; Law, Ryan J.; Elias, Pooja A.; Pellise, Maria; Mackenzie, Todd A.; Rex, Douglas K.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground & aims: There is debate over the type of electrosurgical setting that should be used for polyp resection. Some endoscopists use a type of blended current (yellow), whereas others prefer coagulation (blue). We performed a single-blinded, randomized trial to determine whether type of electrosurgical setting affects risk of adverse events or recurrence. Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection of nonpedunculated colorectal polyps 20 mm or larger (n = 928) were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 design, to groups that received clip closure or no clip closure of the resection defect (primary intervention) and then to either a blended current (Endocut Q) or coagulation current (forced coagulation) (Erbe Inc) (secondary intervention and focus of the study). The study was performed at multiple centers, from April 2013 through October 2017. Patients were evaluated 30 days after the procedure (n = 919), and 675 patients underwent a surveillance colonoscopy at a median of 6 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was any severe adverse event in a per patient analysis. Secondary outcomes were complete resection and recurrence at first surveillance colonoscopy in a per polyp analysis. Results: Serious adverse events occurred in 7.2% of patients in the Endocut group and 7.9% of patients in the forced coagulation group, with no significant differences in the occurrence of types of events. There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of polyps that were completely removed (96% in the Endocut group vs 95% in the forced coagulation group) or the proportion of polyps found to have recurred at surveillance colonoscopy (17% and 17%, respectively). Procedural characteristics were comparable, except that 17% of patients in the Endocut group had immediate bleeding that required an intervention, compared with 11% in the forced coagulation group (P = .006). Conclusions: In a randomized trial to compare 2 commonly used electrosurgical settings for the resection of large colorectal polyps (Endocut vs forced coagulation), we found no difference in risk of serious adverse events, complete resection rate, or polyp recurrence. Electrosurgical settings can therefore be selected based on endoscopist expertise and preference.Item Endoscopist Adenoma Per Colonoscopy Detection Rates and Risk for Post Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer: Data From New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry(Elsevier, 2023-11-21) Anderson, Joseph C.; Rex, Douglas K.; Mackenzie, Todd A.; Hisey, William; Robinson, Christina M.; Butterly, Lynn F.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground and Aims Adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) may be a better measure of colonoscopy quality than adenoma detection rate (ADR) since it credits endoscopists for each detected adenoma. There are few data examining the association between APC and post colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) incidence. We used data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR) to examine APC and PCCRC risk. Methods We included NHCR patients with an index exam and at least one follow up event, either a colonoscopy or a CRC diagnosis. Our outcome was PCCRC defined as any CRC diagnosed > 6 months after an index exam. The exposure variable was endoscopist specific APC quintiles of 0.25, 0.40, 50 and 0.70. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on APC, controlling for age, sex, year of index exam, index findings, bowel preparation and having more than 1 surveillance exam. Results In 32,535 patients, a lower hazard for PCCRC (n=178) was observed for higher APCs as compared to APCs <0.25 (Reference) (0.25-<0.40:HR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.22-0.56;0.40-<0.50: HR=0.31, 95% CI: 0.20-0.49; 0.50-<0.70: HR=0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; and ≥0.70: HR=0.19, 95% CI: 0.09-0.37). When examining endoscopists with an ADR of at least 25%, an APC < 0.50 was associated with a significantly higher hazard than an APC > 0.50 (HR=1.65; 95% CI: 1.06-2.56). A large proportion of endoscopists, 1/5th (32/152; 21.1%), had an ADR >25 but an APC <0.50. Discussion Our novel data demonstrating lower PCCRC risk in exams performed by endoscopists with higher APCs suggest that APC could be a useful quality measure. Quality improvement programs may identify important deficiencies in endoscopist detection performance by measuring APC for endoscopists with ADR > 25%.