Prophylactic Clip Research Articles

The Use of Clips to Prevent Post-Polypectomy Bleeding: A Clinical Review.

The goal of this clinical review is to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the utility of prophylactic clips in reducing postpolypectomy bleeding and to provide an expert statement regarding their appropriateness in clinical practice. Colonoscopy enables the identification and removal of premalignant and malignant lesions through polypectomy, yet complications including postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) can arise. While various studies have explored applying clips prophylactically to prevent PPB, their effectiveness remains uncertain. A literature search conducted in PubMed and Embase identified 671 publications discussing clip use postpolypectomy; 67 were found to be relevant after screening, reporting outcomes related to PPB. Data related to clip utilization, polyp characteristics, and adverse events were extracted and discussed. The current literature suggests that prophylactic clipping is most beneficial for nonpedunculated polyps ≥20mm, especially those in the proximal colon. The utility of clipping smaller polyps and those in the distal colon remains less clear. Antithrombotic medication usage, particularly anticoagulants, has been linked to an increased risk of bleeding, prompting consideration for clip placement in this patient subgroup. While cost-effectiveness analyses may indicate potential savings, the decision to clip should be tailored to individual patient factors and polyp characteristics. Current research suggests that the application of prophylactic clips can be particularly beneficial in preventing delayed bleeding after removal of large nonpedunculated polyps, especially for those in the proximal colon and in patients on antithrombotic medications. In addition, for large pedunculated polyps prophylactic clipping is most effective at controlling immediate bleeding.

Audit of hemostatic clip use after colorectal polyp resection in an academic endoscopy unit.

Background and study aims Prophylactic closure of endoscopic resection defects reduces delayed hemorrhage after resection of non-pedunculated colorectal lesions ≥ 20 mm that are located proximal to the splenic flexure and removed by electrocautery. The risk of delayed hemorrhage after cold (without electrocautery) resection is much lower, and prophylactic clip closure after cold resection is generally unnecessary. The aim of this study was to audit clip use after colorectal polyp resection in routine outpatient colonoscopies at two outpatient centers within an academic medical center. Patients referred for resection of known lesions were excluded. Patients and methods Retrospective chart analysis was performed as part of a quality review of physician adherence to screening and post-polypectomy surveillance intervals. Results Among 3784 total lesions resected cold by 29 physicians, clips were placed after cold resection on 41.7% of 12 lesions ≥ 20 mm, 19.3% of 207 lesions 10 to 19 mm in size, and 2.8% of 3565 lesions 1 to 9 mm in size. Three physicians placed clips after cold resection of lesions 1 to 9 mm in 18.8%, 25.5%, and 45.0% of cases. These physicians accounted for 8.1% of 1- to 9-mm resections, but 69.7% of clips placed in this size range. Electrocautery was used for 3.1% of all resections. Clip placement overall after cold resection (3.9%) was much lower than after resection with electrocautery (71.1%), but 62.4% of all clips placed were after cold resection. Conclusions Audits of clip use in an endoscopy practice can reveal surprising findings, including high and variable rates of unnecessary use after cold resection. Audit can potentially reduce unnecessary costs, carbon emissions, and plastic waste.

Cold Snare Polypectomy in Small (

Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps. Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement. Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding. Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.

Prophylactic Clip Placement in Delayed Polypectomy Bleeding Involving Large Colon Polyps

Prophylactic Clip Placement in Delayed Polypectomy Bleeding Involving Large Colon Polyps

Efficacy of prophylactic clip closure in reducing the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients on anticoagulant therapy: Multicenter prospective study.

The high rate of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in patients undergoing anticoagulant therapy remains a problem. Whether prophylactic clip closure reduces the rate of delayed bleeding in these patients is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clip closure in patients receiving anticoagulants. This multicenter prospective interventional trial was conducted at nine referral centers in Japan. Patients regularly taking anticoagulants, including warfarin potassium or direct oral anticoagulants, and undergoing ESD for colorectal neoplasms were enrolled. The discontinuation of anticoagulants was minimized according to recent guidelines. After the ESD, post-ESD ulcers were prophylactically closed using endoclips. The primary end-point was the incidence of delayed bleeding. The sample size was 45 lesions, and prophylactic clip closurewas considered effective when the upper limit of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for delayed bleeding did not exceed 20%. Forty-five lesions were used, and three were excluded. Complete closure was achieved in 41/42 lesions (97.6%). The overall delayed bleeding rate was low, at 4.9% (2/41; 90% [CI] 0.8-14.5), which was significantly lower than that at the prespecified threshold of 20% (P = 0.007). The median closure procedure time was 17 min, and the median number of clips was nine. No massive delayed bleeding requiring transfusion, interventional radiology, or surgery was observed, and no thromboembolic events were observed. Prophylactic clip closure may reduce the risk of delayed bleeding following colorectal ESD in patients receiving anticoagulants. UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000036734).

Endoscopic prevention of bleeding during resection of mucous membrane neoplasms of hollow organs of gastrointestinal tract

To optimize endoscopic prevention of bleeding during resection of mucous membrane neoplasms of hollow organs of gastrointestinal tract and minimize the risk of intra- and postoperative complications. Ystematic review and meta-analysis were made in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. Statistical analysis was performed in Cohrane Review Manager ver. 5.4. Methods of endoscopic prevention of bleeding during polypectomy, i.e. 0.01% adrenaline injection, endoscopic clip placement and endoscopic polyp band ligation. Endoscopic polyp band ligation is characterized by minimum complication rate. Endoscopic polyp band ligation is preferable due to minimum complication rate. If ligation is impossible, prophylactic clip placement may be performed. Adrenaline injection is the least effective method and may be used only if two above-mentioned methods are ineffective.

Effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding in aspirin users: a propensity-score analysis

Antithrombotic use is a significant risk factor of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). Evidence of prophylactic clipping is only available for proximal and large colonic lesions in the general population. Dedicated studies to examine the benefit of prophylactic clipping in patients on aspirin remain scarce. A propensity score-weighted retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral center from January 2018 to September 2021. Patients who received aspirin and underwent colonoscopic polypectomy, EMR, or endoscopic submucosal dissection were included. Data on baseline demographics, medications, and endoscopic factors (polyp number, size, location, and morphology; resection method; and prophylactic clipping) were captured. Propensity score-weighted models were developed between prophylactic clipping and no clipping groups. The primary outcome was delayed PPB within 30 days, with a composite endpoint consisting of repeated colonoscopy for hemostasis, requirement of blood transfusion, or hemoglobin drop >2 g/dL. A total of 1373 patients with 3952 polyps were included. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 groups. In the multivariate analysis, the largest polyp size was a significant risk factor for PPB (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.11; P= .002). Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a reduced risk of PPB (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, .83-2.18; P= .240) and did not show any risk reduction in subgroups with different polyp sizes and locations and endoscopic resection techniques. Prophylactic clipping was not associated with a lower risk of PPB in aspirin users after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Aspirin use should not be regarded as the only factor for the routine use of prophylactic clips.

Prophylactic Clipping to Prevent Delayed Bleeding and Perforation After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

To help prevent delayed adverse events after endoscopic surgery, endoscopists often place clips at the site. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of prophylactic clipping in the prevention of delayed bleeding and perforation after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Multiple databases were searched from the inception dates to April 2021. And we included all relevant studies. Pooled odds ratio comparing the prophylactic clipped group versus nonprophylactic clipped group were calculated using the random effects model. Twenty-seven articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with a total size of 8693 participants. There was statistically significant difference in prophylactic clipping versus no prophylactic clipping for delayed bleeding and perforation found in all studies (odds ratio: 0.35, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.49, P <0.01; odds ratio: 0.42, 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.83, P <0.05; respectively). Besides, statistically significant difference was also found in subgroup analyses based on patients with lesions larger than 20 mm. Prophylactic clipping was more protective for duodenal delayed adverse events than colorectum. The use of clip closure was more protective to ESD-related delayed adverse events than EMR. Prophylactic clipping after ESD and EMR was beneficial in preventing delayed bleeding and perforation.

Risk factors for local recurrence of large gastrointestinal lesions after endoscopic mucosal resection.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the primary treatment modality for superficial gastrointestinal mucosal lesions > 2cm. However, the procedure carries some risk of complications including bleeding, perforation, and local recurrence. This study aimed to examine factors associated with EMR outcomes, especially in terms of local recurrence. This study retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent EMR and full closure with prophylactic clips for upper and lower gastrointestinal lesions > 2cm at Cleveland Clinic Florida, between January 2013 and December 2018 with follow-up endoscopic evaluation for recurrence. A total of 2031 endoscopic polypectomy cases were examined; 307 EMR procedures among 271 patients (52% were female, mean age 65.6 ± 11.1years) who satisfied the inclusion criteria were included in the study. There were no perforations reported. The rate of post-polypectomy delayed bleeding was 1.6%, and the local recurrence rate in this cohort was 7.1%. Recurrent cases were successfully endoscopically managed. In the multivariate regression analysis, age > 70years (OR = 3.20, 95% CI 1.17-8.76, p = .023), body mass index (OR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.23 p = .008), and lesion size ≥ 35mm (OR = 11.51, 95% CI 3.54-37.40, p = < .001) were independent predictors for recurrence. Age > 70years, increased lesion size, and obesity were found to be independent predictors of local recurrence among EMR procedures for gastrointestinal lesions > 2cm. However, there is a need for larger-scale studies on this topic.

Prophylactic clip closure for mucosal defects is associated with reduced adverse events after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a propensity-score matching analysis

BackgroundIt is unclear whether prophylactic endoscopic closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) reduces the risk of postoperative adverse events due to variability in lesion characteristics. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study using propensity score matching to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic clip closure in preventing postoperative adverse events after colorectal ESD.MethodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included 219 colorectal neoplasms which were removed by ESD. The patients were allocated into the closure and non-closure groups, which were compared before and after propensity-score matching. Post-ESD adverse events including major and minor bleeding and delayed perforation were compared between the two groups.ResultsIn this present study, 97 and 122 lesions were allocated to the closure and non-closure groups, respectively, and propensity score matching created 61 matched pairs. The rate of adverse events was significantly lower in the closure group than in the non-closure group (8% vs. 28%, P = 0.008). Delayed perforation occurred in two patients in the non-closure group, whereas no patient in the closure group developed delayed perforation. In contrast, there were no significant differences in other postoperative events including the rate of abdominal pain; fever, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein; and appetite loss between the two groups.ConclusionsPropensity score matching analysis demonstrated that prophylactic closure was associated with a significantly reduced rate of adverse events after colorectal ESD. When technically feasible, mucosal defect closure after colorectal ESD may result in a favorable postoperative course.

Effect of prophylactic endoscopic clip placement on clinically significant post-endoscopic mucosal resection bleeding in the right colon: a single-centre, randomised controlled trial

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a cornerstone in the management of large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps. Clinically significant post-EMR bleeding occurs in 7% of cases and is most frequently encountered in the right colon. We aimed to assess the use of prophylactic clip closure in preventing clinically significant post-EMR bleeding within the right colon. We conducted a randomised controlled trial at a tertiary centre in Australia. Patients referred for the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps in the right colon were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into the clip or control (no clip) group, using a computerised random-number generator. The primary endpoint was clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, defined as haematochezia necessitating emergency department presentation, hospitalisation, or re-intervention within 14 days post-EMR, which was analysed on the basis of intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02196649, and has been completed. Between Feb 4, 2016, and Dec 15, 2020, 231 patients were randomly assigned: 118 to the clip group and 113 to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, clinically significant post-EMR bleeding was less frequent in the clip group than in the control group (four [3·4%] of 118 patients vs 12 [10·6%] of 113; p=0·031; absolute risk reduction 7·2% [95% CI 0·7-13·8]; number needed to treat 13·9). There were no differences between groups in adverse events, including delayed perforation (one [<1%] in the clip group vs one [<1%] in the control group) and post-EMR pain (four [3%] vs six [5%]). No deaths were reported. Prophylactic clip closure can be performed following the EMR of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps of 20 mm or larger in the right colon to reduce the risk of clinically significant post-EMR bleeding. None.

Ability of prophylactic clipping to reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding in patients undergoing endoscopic resection of colonic polyps: a rapid evidence assessment review

Background: Delayed bleeding is a recognised complicationf ollowing colonic endoscopic resection. Prophylactic clip application is often used to reduce this. However, there is a lack of guidelines to support this. Aims: This article aims to review the most recent evidence on the question: 'In patients undergoing endoscopic resection of colonic polyps, does prophylactic clipping of the resection, compared with not clipping, reduce the incidence of delayed bleeding?'. Methods: A rapid assessment was undertaken regarding prophylactic clipping efficacy to reduce delayed bleeding. A search of three databases (Medline, the University of Derby Library Plus and the Cochrane Library) was undertaken to identify articles from the past 4 years. Findings: Eight publications were reviewed: three meta-analyses and five randomised control trials. Five publications recommended against prophylactic clipping following colonic endoscopic resection and three, the most recent publications, strongly recommended it, specifically for those at high risk of delayed bleeding. Conclusion: Prophylactic clip application to reduce delayed bleeding is not effective across all colonic resections. However, there is evidence in favour of clipping for patients with high risk of delayed bleeding.

The efficacy of prophylactic clip closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection on delayed bleeding

Objective Although prophylactic clip closure after endoscopic mucosal resection may prevent delayed bleeding, information regarding colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (CR-ESD) is lacking. Therefore, this study evaluated the effect of prophylactic clip closure on delayed bleeding rate after CR-ESD. Materials and methods A total of 614 CR-ESD procedures performed in 561 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome, which was delayed bleeding rate, was analyzed between the prophylactic clip closure and non-closure groups. Furthermore, the predictors of delayed bleeding were also evaluated. Results The patients were divided into the clip closure group (n = 275) and non-closure group (n = 339). Delayed bleeding rate was significantly lower in the closure group than in non-closure group (6 cases [2.2%] vs. 20 cases [5.9%], p = .026). The univariate logistic regression analyses revealed that delayed bleeding was significantly associated with laterally spreading tumor-granular-nodular mixed type (LST-G-Mix; odds ratio [OR], 3.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70–8.34; p = .001). By contrast, prophylactic clip closure was significantly associated with low delayed bleeding rate (OR, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.14–0.90; p = .029). The multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed LST-G-Mix as a significant independent delayed bleeding predictor (OR, 3.25; 95%CI, 1.45–7.32; p = .004), whereas, prophylactic clip closure was identified as a significant independent preventive factor of delayed bleeding (OR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.15–1.00; p = .049). Conclusions Prophylactic clip closure after CR-ESD is associated with low delayed bleeding rate. LST-G-Mix promotes delayed bleeding, and performing prophylactic clip closure may be advisable.

ID: 3523875 POST-POLYPECTOMY BLEEDING WITH PROPHYLACTIC CLIPS: EAST MEETS WEST

The rate of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) per colonoscopy is 0.44%. Studies have shown that PPB rate is affected by polyp size and colon location, but there has been no comparison between population regions. We sought to investigate the PPB difference when prophylactic clips were employed post-polypectomy between East- and West-based populations.

ID: 3526518 PROPHYLACTIC ENDOSCOPIC CLIP PLACEMENT PREVENTS CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT POST ENDOSCOPIC MUCOSAL RESECTION BLEEDING IN THE RIGHT COLON - A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a cornerstone in the management of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) ≥ 20mm. Clinically-significant post-EMR bleeding (CSPEB) is commonly encountered after the resection of large lesions. The utility of prophylactic clip closure of the EMR defect in preventing CSPEB in the right colon has not been independently assessed.

Factors associated with complete clip closure after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM : Delayed bleeding is a common adverse event following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large colorectal polyps. Prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of nonpedunculated polyps larger than 20 mm reduces the incidence of severe delayed bleeding, especially in proximal polyps. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with complete prophylactic clip closure of the mucosal defect after EMR of large polyps. METHODS : This is a post hoc analysis of the CLIP study (NCT01936948). All patients randomized to the clip group were included. Main outcome was complete clip closure of the mucosal resection defect. The defect was considered completely closed when no remaining mucosal defect was visible and clips were less than 1 cm apart. Factors associated with complete closure were evaluated in multivariable analysis. RESULTS : In total, 458 patients (age 65, 58 % men) with 494 large polyps were included. Complete clip closure of the resection defect was achieved for 338 polyps (68.4 %); closure was not complete for 156 (31.6 %). Factors associated with complete closure in adjusted analysis were smaller polyp size (odds ratio 1.06 for every millimeter decrease [95 % confidence interval 1.02-1.08]), good access (OR 3.58 [1.94-9.59]), complete submucosal lifting (OR 2.28 [1.36-3.90]), en bloc resection (OR 5.75 [1.48-22.39]), and serrated histology (OR 2.74 [1.35-5.56]). CONCLUSIONS : Complete clip closure was not achieved for almost one in three resected large nonpedunculated polyps. While stable access and en bloc resection facilitate clip closure, most factors associated with clip closure are not modifiable. This highlights the need for alternative closure options and measures to prevent bleeding.

How to Manage the Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyp

How to Manage the Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyp

Prevention of Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colonic Polyps: to Clip or not to Clip

Endoscopic resection of large colonic lesions once thought only amenable to surgery is now standard treatment, but post-procedure bleeding has been common, occurring in 5–10% of patients. This review summarizes efficacy data on clip closure to reduce bleeding risk, selection of polyps, costs and limitations. Randomized control trials and meta-analysis provide strong evidence for the benefit of prophylactic clip closure to prevent bleeding after endoscopic resection of large ≥ 20-mm proximal polyps, but not for smaller polyps or for large polyps in the distal colon. Clip closure techniques need to be improved, and further research may help to better identify which patients may most benefit from prophylactic closure. Post-procedure bleeding is the most common complication after large polyp resection. Clip closure of the mucosal defect after resection of all proximal 20-mm polyps should be attempted because it reduces bleeding risk by at least half.

Effect of prophylactic clip application for the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding of large pedunculated colonic polyps: a randomized controlled trial

Prophylactic application of a hemoclip has been suggested as an alternative to the use of an endoloop for the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB) when resecting large, pedunculated colorectal polyps. Therefore, this multicenter, randomized controlled trial investigated the efficacy of prophylactic hemoclip application to reduce PPB during the resection of large pedunculated polyps. Large pedunculated polyps (≥10mm in head diameter) were eligible for inclusion. Polyps were randomized into a study arm (where clips were applied before resection) and a control arm (without pretreatment). The primary outcome was the rate of PPB in each group. PPB included immediate PPB (IPPB) and delayed PPB (DPPB). IPPB was defined as blood oozing (≥1 minute) or active spurting occurring immediately after polyp resection. DPPB was defined as rectal bleeding, occurring after completion of the colonoscopy. In total, 238 polyps from 204 patients were randomized into the clip arm (119 polyps) or the control arm (119 polyps). Overall bleeding adverse events were observed in 20 cases (IPPB, 16; DPPB, 4). The rate of overall PPB, IPPB, and DPPB was 8.4%, 6.7%, and 1.7%, respectively, for all polyps. The rate of overall PPB (clip 4.2% vs control 12.6%, P= .033) and IPPB (clip 2.5% vs control 10.9%, P= .017) was significantly lower in the clip arm than the control arm. Prophylactic clipping before resecting large pedunculated polyps can reduce overall PPB and IPPB compared with no prior treatment. Therefore, prophylactic clipping may be considered before resection of large pedunculated polyps. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02156193.).

Role of prophylactic hemoclip placement in prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding for large colon polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BackgroundPolypectomy is a widely used and effective procedure to treat precancerous polyps. Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB), a common complication of polypectomy, may diminish the utility of this procedure. Previous data on the efficacy of hemoclips has been conflicting, therefore we aimed to collectively evaluate and analyze the data to reach a definitive conclusion on the efficacy of using hemoclips to prevent incidences of DPPB in patients with large polyps (≥10 mm).MethodsWe identified a total of 261 studies based on our previously defined search strategy. After screening, we included 6 randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis was performed comparing the use of prophylactic application of hemoclips to a standard group without prophylactic clip placement for large polyps.ResultsWe found a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of DPPB when using hemoclips for large polyps. The overall incidence of DPPB was lower in the hemoclip group compared to the standard group for all large polyps ≥10 mm (relative risk 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.75; P=0.01; I2=0%).ConclusionsThe use of hemoclips in achieving hemostasis for large polyps has a beneficial effect and appears to prevent DPPB. This reinforces the routine clinical practice of using hemoclips in polypectomy procedures.