Endoscopic mucosal resection with precutting vs. anchoring technique using snare tip for 10-25 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial.
Eur J Gastroenterol HepatolApr 17, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchGastroenterology
Jong Yoon Lee, Hee Yoon Noh, Yang Hyun Baek et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This randomized controlled trial compared precutting EMR (P-EMR) and anchoring EMR (A-EMR) techniques for resecting nonpedunculated colorectal polyps sized 10-25 mm. Both techniques achieved high R0 resection rates (93.7% for P-EMR vs. 88.9% for A-EMR), but A-EMR had significantly shorter injection-to-snaring and total procedure times.
Key findings
- R0 resection rates were 93.7% for P-EMR and 88.9% for A-EMR, with no significant difference (P = 0.344).
- A-EMR had a significantly shorter injection-to-snaring time of 181.8 ± 81.9 seconds compared to 320.9 ± 143.5 seconds for P-EMR (P < 0.001).
- Total procedure time was significantly shorter for A-EMR at 259.7 ± 139.7 seconds versus 479.8 ± 249.0 seconds for P-EMR (P < 0.001).
- Adverse events were comparable between both techniques.
Why it matters
Understanding the efficiency and effectiveness of different EMR techniques is crucial for optimizing colorectal polyp management. This study highlights that while both methods are effective, A-EMR may offer time-saving benefits in clinical practice.