Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Jan;60(1):217-25.
doi: 10.1007/s10620-014-3320-2. Epub 2014 Aug 12.

The histological quality and adequacy of diminutive colorectal polyps resected using jumbo versus hot biopsy forceps

Bulent Yasar  1 , Huseyin Kayadibi, Evren Abut, Dilek Benek, Koray Kochan, Can Gonen
Affiliations
Comparative Study

The histological quality and adequacy of diminutive colorectal polyps resected using jumbo versus hot biopsy forceps

Bulent Yasar et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Polypectomy with jumbo forceps (JF) and polypectomy with hot biopsy forceps (HBF) are still widely used techniques for removal of diminutive colorectal polyps (DCPs). JF may be more effective for the removal of DCPs because of their larger size.

Aim: To evaluate the histological quality and adequacy of DCPs resected using JF compared with HBF.

Methods: One hundred and seventy-nine patients with 237 DCPs were included in this study. DCPs were removed using either JP or HBF.

Results: The tissue architecture was good in 29.9 % of the HBF group, in comparison with 90 % of the JF group (p < 0.001). No cautery damage or crash artifact was observed in 93.3 % of JF group and in 8.5 % of HBF group (p < 0.001). Moreover, there were statistically significant differences between the groups with regard to the high level of cautery damage or crush artifact (p < 0.001). The overall diagnostic quality of the specimens removed using JF was significantly better than that of the specimens removed by HBF (96 vs. 80 %, respectively, p < 0.001). There were statistically significant inverse associations between cautery damage or crush artifact and overall diagnostic quality of HBF and JF (r = -0.373, p < 0.001; r = -0.382, p < 0.001, respectively). Surgical margins were determined as negative in 87.5 % of the JF group and in 76.1 % of the HBF group (p = 0.022). A total of 80.8 % of the JF specimens and 30.8 % of the HBF specimens were well evaluated for two lateral and deep surgical margins (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: JF was superior to HBF for histopathological interpretation and eradication of DCPs.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jan;75(1):118-26 - PubMed
    1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Mar;73(3):419-22 - PubMed
    1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Aug;68(2):273-8; quiz 334, 336 - PubMed
    1. Radiology. 1984 Aug;152(2):301-3 - PubMed
    1. Am J Gastroenterol. 1987 Jul;82(7):615-8 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources