Skip to content

Comparative Study of Anchoring-tip vs. Conventional EMR of Colorectal Polyps

Comparative Study of Anchoring-tip vs. Conventional EMR of Intermediate-Size Colorectal Polyps: Multi-center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04825457
Enrollment
200
Registered
2021-04-01
Start date
2021-04-30
Completion date
2022-03-31
Last updated
2021-04-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Colorectal Polyp

Brief summary

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective and has been widely used technique for the treatment of superficial colorectal neoplasms. Although, conventional EMR (CEMR) showed high efficacy for the management of colorectal superficial neoplasms, there is problematic limitation in this technique - incomplete resection. In literature, the anchoring-tip EMR (AEMR), named as Tip-in EMR was first introduced in 2016 from Japan. Recently, several retrospective studies have been suggested about the effectiveness of AEMR. However, there has been no prospective randomized controlled study to identify its advantage over CEMR. Therefore, the investigators performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to estimate the effectiveness of AEMR compared with CEMR for the endoscopic treatment of intermediate-size (10 to 20 mm) colorectal polyps.

Detailed description

After injection of normal saline solution mix, snaring was tried for CEMR. In AEMR, the snare tip was projected from the sheath by 1-2 mm length. Consequently, a small mucosal incision was made at proximal side of lesion. Then the snare was deployed progressively and adjusted around the lesion trying to obtain free margins. At the final step of both conventional and Tip-in EMR, the lesion was resected.

Interventions

PROCEDUREAnchoring-tip vs. Conventional

Anchoring-tip: the snare tip was projected from the sheath by 1-2 mm length. Consequently, a small mucosal incision was made at proximal side of lesion. Then the snare was deployed progressively and adjusted around the lesion trying to obtain free margins. At the final step of both conventional and Tip-in EMR, the lesion was resected. Conventional: After injection of normal saline solution mix, snaring was tried for polyp resection.

Sponsors

Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Caregiver)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Intermediate-size (10 to 20 mm) colorectal polyps * Morphologically sessile (Is), slightly elevated (IIa), flat (IIb), and slightly depressed (IIc) as Paris classification of superficial neoplastic lesions * Laterally spreading tumor (granular and nongranular type) as Kudo classification.

Exclusion criteria

* Pedunculated or excavated/ulcerated polyps * Polyps with features strongly suggestive of submucosal invasive carcinoma * Polyps in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, familial polyposis, electrolyte abnormality, and coagulopathy * Residual lesions after endoscopic resection or presence of severe submucosal fibrosis.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Primary outcome was comparing the R0 resection rate between Anchoring-tip EMR and Conventional EMR.From EMR to reporting of histopathology, 1 monthHistopathologic complete resection (R0) was defined as en bloc resection and clear lateral and vertical resection margins.

Countries

South Korea

Contacts

Primary ContactJoon Seop Lee, M.D., Ph.D.
coolsmurf@naver.com+82-53-200-3084

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026