Paper Infomation
Comparative Study of Cold Loop Resection Versus Traditional Thermal Resection in the Treatment of Small Colorectal Polyps
Full Text(PDF, 38KB)
Author: Ziwan Zhang
Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the differences between cold snare polypectomy and conventional hot snare polypectomy in technical efficacy and clinical safety for treating small colorectal polyps (maximum diameter ≤10 mm), thereby providing a data foundation for clinical practice decision-making. Methods: From 2025, a total of 40 eligible patients with small colorectal polyps were selected and divided into a cold snare polypectomy group (CSP group, n=20) or a traditional hot snare polypectomy group (HSP group, n=20) based on endoscopic treatment methods. The primary evaluation metric focused on the complete en bloc resection success rate of lesions, while secondary metrics included intraoperative immediate bleeding events, postoperative delayed bleeding events, intestinal wall perforation rates, and the average duration required to remove a single polyp. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the success rate of achieving complete polyp resection between the two groups. However, in terms of safety performance, the CSP group exhibited significantly fewer cases of intraoperative immediate bleeding compared to the HSP group (P<0.05). Additionally, the CSP group had no instances of postoperative delayed bleeding or perforation, whereas the HSP group experienced one postoperative delayed bleeding case. Regarding procedural duration, the CSP group demonstrated significantly shorter average time to remove a single polyp compared to the HSP group (P<0.01). Conclusion: For colorectal polyps with diameters of 10 mm or less, cold snare polypectomy achieves similar clearance efficacy to thermal resection techniques while demonstrating superior intraoperative safety characteristics and more efficient procedural workflow. This method effectively mitigates potential complications arising from thermal effects of electric energy, thus holding clear clinical significance for widespread application.
Keywords: Colorectal Polyps; Cold Snare Excision; Hot Excision; Efficacy Comparison; Treatment Safety
References:
[1] 马艳,武曼群,胡建平,等.结直肠息肉冷圈套切除术的临床疗效分析[J].宁夏医科大学学报,2024,46(01):97-100.
[2] 曾庆新,陈雪芳,彭如洁.内镜下冷圈套器切除术在老年人结直肠小息肉的安全性及有效性的分析[J].中国医疗器械信息,2023,29(21):119-121.
[3] 刘永林,黄加驹,谢丽敏,等.肠镜下冷圈套切除术与热圈套切除术治疗5～10mm结直肠息肉的临床疗效及安全性分析[J].现代消化及介入诊疗,2024,29(12):1426-1429.
[4] 曹司,晁漪澜,杨春敏.内镜下冷圈套切除对结直肠无蒂小息肉的临床疗效观察[J].北京医学,2023,45(08):680-683.
[5] 杨清清,高志芳,潘慧,等.内镜下不同圈套器切除术治疗结直肠小息肉的效果观察[J].中国社区医师,2023,39(18):61-63.
[6] 王欢.电子结肠镜下冷圈套切除术治疗结直肠息肉的临床疗效及安全性[J].中国医疗器械信息,2023,29(08):70-72.
[7] 叶建红,赵明,苏祥娟.内镜下不同术式在不同部位的结直肠小息肉中的临床治疗效果研究[J].婚育与健康,2024,30(14):52-54.
[8] 杨少辉,马晨阳,王瑜,等.腹腔镜联合肠镜经肛全直肠系膜切除术8例[J].中华胃肠外科杂志,2025,28(06):684-687.
[9] 汪赓,姚潇,吴远珏,等.新辅助放化疗对经腹会阴联合直肠切除术后会阴伤口恢复的影响[J].中华胃肠外科杂志,2024,27(06):615-620.
[10] 张卫,朱晓明.腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术中直肠侧系膜处理方式[J].中国实用外科杂志,2023,43(10):1107-1110.
[11] 顾磊,徐庆.直肠癌经肛全直肠系膜切除术的现状与思考[J].肿瘤,2023,43(5):382-388.
[12] 张磊,汪恒,郭锐.门诊冷圈套器切除术与EMR术,热圈套器切除术治疗结直肠小息肉的对比研究[J].现代诊断与治疗,2023,34(1):112-114.
[13] 张婷婷,吴兆映.内镜下冷圈套息肉切除术在老年患者结直肠小息肉治疗中的应用[J].皖南医学院学报,2025,44(2):156-158.
[14] 谷玺,曹燕雯,张园.冷圈套切除术与热圈套切除术治疗结直肠小息肉的对比研究[J].医学综述,2024,30(1):119-122.
[15] 石腾渤,刘辉.冷圈套息肉切除术治疗结直肠息肉的研究进展[J].医药前沿,2024,14(17):16-20.