Send to

Choose Destination
Gut. 2016 May;65(5):806-20. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308481. Epub 2015 Feb 13.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author information

Endoscopy Unit, 'Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital', Rome, Italy.
Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Milan, Italy.
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, Kansas, USA.
im3D S.p.A., Turin, Italy.
Department of Health Economy and Health Management, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
AOU S Giovanni Battista-CPO Piemonte, SCDO Epidemiologia dei Tumori 2, Turin, Italy.
Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy.
Department of Gastroenterology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK.
Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.



To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps.


Relevant publications were identified in MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Central Register for the period 1966-2014. Studies in which ≥20 mm colorectal neoplastic lesions were treated with endoscopic resection were included. Rates of postendoscopic resection surgery due to non-curative resection or adverse events, as well as the rates of complete endoscopic removal, invasive cancer, adverse events, recurrence and mortality, were extracted. Study quality was ascertained according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Forest plot was produced based on random effect models. I2 statistic was used to describe the variation across studies due to heterogeneity. Meta-regression analysis was also performed.


50 studies including 6442 patients and 6779 large polyps were included in the analyses. Overall, 503 out of 6442 patients (pooled rate: 8%, 95% CI 7% to 10%, I2=78.6%) underwent surgery due to non-curative endoscopic resection, and 31/6442 (pooled rate: 1%, 95% CI 0.7% to 1.4%, I2=0%) to adverse events. Invasive cancer at histology, non-curative endoscopic resection, synchronous lesions and recurrence accounted for 58%, 28%, 2.2% and 5.9% of all the surgeries, respectively. Endoscopic perforation occurred in 96/6595 (1.5%, 95% CI 1.2% to 1.7%) polyps, while bleeding in 423/6474 (6.5%, 95% CI 5.9% to 7.1%). Overall, 5334 patients entered in surveillance, 502/5836 (8.6%, 95% CI 7.9% to 9.3%) being lost at follow-up. Endoscopic recurrence was detected in 735/5334 patients (13.8%, 95% CI 12.9% to 14.7%), being an invasive cancer in 14/5334 (0.3%, 95% CI 0.1% to 0.4%). Endoscopic treatment was successful in 664/735 cases (90.3%, 95% CI 88.2% to 92.5%). Mortality related with management of large polyps was reported in 5/6278 cases (0.08%, 95% CI 0.01% to 0.15%).


Endoscopic resection of large polyps appeared to be an extremely effective and safe intervention. However, an adequate endoscopic surveillance is necessary for its long-term efficacy.



[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire
Loading ...
Support Center