Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

OPEN ACCESS

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Clin Endosc > Volume 37(3); 2008 > Article
Histological Quality of Small Polyps Resected Using Different Electric Currents in a Colonoscopic Polypectomy
Clinical Endoscopy 2008;37(3):174-178.
DOI: https://doi.org/
Published online: September 30, 2008
Departments of Internal Medicine and *Pathology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
prev next
  • 1,951 Views
  • 10 Download
  • 0 Crossref
  • 0 Scopus
prev next

Background
/Aims: Most polyps encountered during a colonoscopic polypectomy are small. Thus, accurate evaluation of small polyp histology is important in the decision-making process. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the histological quality of polyps obtained by the use of snare polypectomy with two different electric currents. Methods: Consecutive polyps less than 1 cm were identified and removed by use of either the blend mode (Blended mode, Circon, BC-200) or automatic cutting and coagulation mode (Endocut Q mode, effect 3, 40 watts, ERBE, VAIO-300). An experienced gastrointestinal pathologist evaluated the specimens for cautery damage, margin, architecture, presence of muscularis mucosa and general histological quality. Results: Sixty-six patients (77.2% men; mean age, 60.2±9.2 years) underwent 109 polypectomies (53 using the blended mode and 56 using the Endocut Q mode; mean polyp diameter, 0.87±0.17 mm). Age, gender, location, diameter and the histology of the polyp was not different with the use of both methods. The cautery amount (≥2) with use of the blended mode was not significantly different than with the use of the Endocut mode (50.9% vs. 39.2%, p=0.22). The cautery degree, margin, architecture, presence of muscular mucosa and overall histological quality was not different with the use of both methods. Conclusions: The histological quality of polyps less than 1 cm obtained by use of either the blended mode or Endocut Q mode was not different. (Korean J Gastrointest Endosc 2008;37:174- 178)


Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
Close layer
TOP