Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Polyps: Identifying High-Risk Patients.

IF 2.5 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2021-12-24 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CEG.S282699
Oliver Bendall, Joel James, Katarzyna M Pawlak, Sauid Ishaq, J Andy Tau, Noriko Suzuki, Steven Bollipo, Keith Siau
{"title":"Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Polyps: Identifying High-Risk Patients.","authors":"Oliver Bendall,&nbsp;Joel James,&nbsp;Katarzyna M Pawlak,&nbsp;Sauid Ishaq,&nbsp;J Andy Tau,&nbsp;Noriko Suzuki,&nbsp;Steven Bollipo,&nbsp;Keith Siau","doi":"10.2147/CEG.S282699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a potentially severe complication of therapeutic colonoscopy which can result in hospital readmission and re-intervention. Over the last decade, rates of DPPB reported in the literature have fallen from over 2% to 0.3-1.2%, largely due to improvements in resection technique, a shift towards cold snare polypectomy, better training, adherence to guidelines on periprocedural antithrombotic management, and the use of antithrombotics with more favourable bleeding profiles. However, as the complexity of polypectomy undertaken worldwide increases, so does the importance of identifying patients at increased risk of DPPB. Risk factors can be categorised according to patient, polyp and personnel related factors, and their integration together to provide an individualised risk score is an evolving field. Strategies to reduce DPPB include safe practices relevant to all patients undergoing colonoscopy, as well as specific considerations for patients identified to be high risk. This narrative review sets out an evidence-based summary of factors that contribute to the risk of DPPB before discussing pragmatic interventions to mitigate their risk and improve patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":10208,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology","volume":"14 ","pages":"477-492"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cc/71/ceg-14-477.PMC8714413.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S282699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a potentially severe complication of therapeutic colonoscopy which can result in hospital readmission and re-intervention. Over the last decade, rates of DPPB reported in the literature have fallen from over 2% to 0.3-1.2%, largely due to improvements in resection technique, a shift towards cold snare polypectomy, better training, adherence to guidelines on periprocedural antithrombotic management, and the use of antithrombotics with more favourable bleeding profiles. However, as the complexity of polypectomy undertaken worldwide increases, so does the importance of identifying patients at increased risk of DPPB. Risk factors can be categorised according to patient, polyp and personnel related factors, and their integration together to provide an individualised risk score is an evolving field. Strategies to reduce DPPB include safe practices relevant to all patients undergoing colonoscopy, as well as specific considerations for patients identified to be high risk. This narrative review sets out an evidence-based summary of factors that contribute to the risk of DPPB before discussing pragmatic interventions to mitigate their risk and improve patient safety.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内镜下结肠息肉切除术后迟发性出血:识别高危患者。
息肉切除术后延迟出血(DPPB)是治疗性结肠镜检查的潜在严重并发症,可导致再次住院和再次干预。在过去十年中,文献报道的DPPB发生率从2%以上下降到0.3-1.2%,这主要是由于切除技术的改进,向冷陷阱息肉切除术的转变,更好的培训,遵守围手术期抗血栓治疗指南,以及使用具有更有利出血情况的抗血栓药物。然而,随着世界范围内息肉切除术的复杂性增加,识别DPPB风险增加的患者的重要性也在增加。风险因素可以根据患者、息肉和人员相关因素进行分类,并将它们整合在一起以提供个性化风险评分是一个不断发展的领域。减少DPPB的策略包括与所有接受结肠镜检查的患者相关的安全做法,以及对确定为高风险患者的具体考虑。在讨论减轻风险和提高患者安全的实用干预措施之前,本叙述性综述对导致DPPB风险的因素进行了基于证据的总结。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Therapeutic Potential of Etrasimod in the Management of Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Evidence to Date. Correlation Between Tumor Budding and Survivin Expression in Colorectal Cancer. Predicting Survival Among Colorectal Cancer Patients: Development and Validation of Polygenic Survival Score. Refractory Crohn's Disease: Perspectives, Unmet Needs and Innovations. Patient-Generated Images in Perianal Disease: An Evolving Tool in Proctology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1