Adenoma ColonNCT04138030
Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Versus Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Colonic Lateral Spreading Lesions - A Randomised Controlled Trial
A study testing Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in people with Adenoma Colon and Colon Adenoma, run by Western Sydney Local Health District at 1 site in Australia.
Trial summary
Comparing the complete resection rate and subsequent adenoma recurrence rate at surveillance colonoscopy of 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas for conventional EMR vs. cold snare EMR. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 99 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Adenoma Colon, Colon Adenoma, Colon Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 182 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustralia
- Study dates
- 12 Nov 2019to 5 Mar 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 99 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Any patient undergoing colonoscopy who is older than 18 years of age, has a written consent for trial participation and has at least one LSL meeting to the following description:
- Localisation in the colon or rectum
- Benign adenomatous surface features (Kudo III / IV, JNET 2a)
- Granular or non-granular topography
- Paris classification 0-IIa/IIb +/- Is
- If present, sessile component may be no greater than 10mm in size.
- Polyp size ranging from 15 to 40mm
Who cannot join
- Current use of antiplatelet (excluding aspirin) or anticoagulants which have not appropriately been interrupted according to the guidelines.
- Known bleeding disorder or coagulopathy.
- Pregnancy
- History of inflammatory bowel disease
- Previously attempted or otherwise non-lifting lesions
- Endoscopic features suggestive of submucosal invasion (Kudo Vi/n, JNET 2b / 3) or concurrent CRC
- Lesions involving the ileocaecal valve (ICV) or the anorectal junction (ARJ)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Conventional Versus Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Colonic Lateral Spreading Lesions - A Randomised Controlled Trial
Comparing the complete resection rate and subsequent adenoma recurrence rate at surveillance colonoscopy of 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas for conventional EMR vs. cold snare EMR.
Read the detailed description
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer related death, with rates being highest in Western countries. Colonoscopy is considered the golden standard in colorectal cancer screening and endoscopic resection of precursor lesions (polyps) has been shown to reduce colorectal cancer death. Polyps extending over 10mm, also referred to as lateral spreading lesions (LSL) if non-pedunculated, more often demonstrate advanced histological features and are considered to be at greater risk for malignant transition as compared to their smaller counterparts. Incomplete endoscopic resection of advanced adenomas may lead to adenoma recurrence and contribute to the development of so called 'interval cancers', which occur during the 6 - 36 month period following complete colonoscopy. Interval cancers account for up to 6% of newly diagnosed CRC cases, highlighting the importance of complete resection.
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a well-established inject and resect method for the removal of LSLs using chromo-gelofusin based submucosal lift and subsequent cauterisation assisted snare excision. Lesions up to 25mm in size may be removed enbloc, whereas larger lesions are generally removed in a piecemeal fashion. Contrary to enbloc resection, piecemeal EMR is historically associated with relatively high recurrence rates of 15-20%. A recent four centre trial led by Westmead Hospital published in gastroenterology (impact factor 20.8) has shown that application of snare-tip soft coag (STSC) to the EMR defect margins considerably improves recurrence rates to around 7% in adenomatous LSL. Common complications of EMR such as intra-procedural bleeding (IPB) or clinically significant post-procedural bleeding (CSPB), deep mural injury (DMI) and post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome (PPCS) are largely related to the use of cauterisation for tissue transection. Although complication rates have improved and effects can often be managed endoscopically, further optimization of the EMR safety profile is needed in the background of an aging target population with multiple co-morbidities and widespread use of anticoagulants.
Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has become the standard of care for removal of subcentimeter polyps. CSP relies on the use of dedicated stiff thin wire snares that are able to swiftly cut through mucosal tissue without the need for cauterisation, leaving intact the muscularis mucosa and the deeper submucosal layers, virtually excluding the risk of perforation. The absence of delayed cauterisation effect significantly reduces the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding, even in patients on anticoagulant therapy. Complete resection rates of polyps ranging from 6 to 10mm in size were found to be non-inferior in CSP as compared to cauterisation based resection. Moreover, resecting a sufficient margin of normal mucosa surrounding the polyp (i.e. >1mm) yields an excellent 98% complete resection rate in polyps <10mm in size without increasing the risk of delayed bleeding. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly shorter procedure time when applying the cold snare resection technique in small polyps. Snare size limitations of dedicated cold snares however do not allow for en-bloc resection of polyps >10mm.
Recently, cold snare piecemeal EMR was shown to be safe and effective for the removal of large sessile serrated polyps (SSP). Combined evidence from a limited number of small single centre mostly retrospective studies investigating cold snare piecemeal polypectomy in adenomas over 10mm demonstrated recurrence rates of around 11% whilst maintaining an excellent safety profile with minimal complication rates. However, recurrence rates rise to 22% in the subgroup of polyps over 20mm. Thus far cold snare piecemeal polypectomy of lateral-spreading adenomas has not yet been compared to conventional EMR in prospective randomized fashion.
- Conditions
- Adenoma Colon, Colon Adenoma, Colon Cancer
- Being tested
- Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
- Keywords
- Colonoscopy, Polypectomy, Adenoma, Colorectal cancer
- Medical subject headings
- Colonic Neoplasms, Adenoma, Colorectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionProcedure or surgery
Also called Conventional EMR
Use of injected chromogelofusine solution to raise a lesion prior to polypectomy snare closed over a polyp with electrocautery
Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionProcedure or surgery
Also called CSP
Use of injected chromogelofusine solution to raise a lesion prior to polypectomy snare closed over a polyp without electrocautery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection | Active comparator | Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), if necessary, to 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas. Receives: Procedure: Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
| Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection | Active comparator | Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), if necessary, to 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas. Receives: Procedure: Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Complete resection rate
Complete resection rate (CRR) as determined by endoscopic assessment (no visible residual adenoma) and histological assessment (biopsies of resection margin)
Measured: 1 day
Adenoma recurrence rate
Adenoma recurrence rate (ARR) at SC1 as determined by endoscopic assessment (no visible recurrent adenoma) and histological assessment (scar biopsies)
Measured: 4-6 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
Time to perform polypectomy
Time needed to perform polyp resection measured from first snare positioning until complete resection is achieved based on endoscopic assessment, and total procedure time from insertion of the scope until all specimens have been collected and the scope withdrawal is completed.
Measured: 1 day
Intra-procedural and post-procedural complications
Intra-procedural and post-procedural complications rates (IPB / CSPB / DMI / PPCS) as previously described
Measured: 30 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Oct 2019
- Study start12 Nov 2019
- Primary completion5 Mar 2024
- Study completion5 Mar 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Adenoma ColonStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Parallel Assignment
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 182 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Western Sydney Local Health District
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Professor Michael Bourke, Western Sydney Local Health District
- Investigators
- Michael Bourke, MBBS, Principal investigator, Western SLHD
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04138030
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- (6114) 2019/ETH11826
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 20 Oct 2019
- Last updated
- 27 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
O'Sullivan T, Cronin O, van Hattem WA, Mandarino FV, Gauci JL, Kerrison C, Whitfield A, Gupta S, Lee E, Williams SJ, Burgess N, Bourke MJ. Cold versus hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection for large (>/=15 mm) flat non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2024 Oct 7;73(11):1823-1830. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2024-332807.
PubMed 38964854
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Conventional Versus Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Colonic Lateral Spreading Lesions - A Randomised Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04138030
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- (6114) 2019/ETH11826
- Conditions
- Adenoma Colon, Colon Adenoma, Colon Cancer
- Keywords
- Colonoscopy, Polypectomy, Adenoma, Colorectal cancer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 182 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Western Sydney Local Health DistrictUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 Nov 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 5 Mar 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 5 Mar 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Oct 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Comparing the complete resection rate and subsequent adenoma recurrence rate at surveillance colonoscopy of 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas for conventional EMR vs. cold snare EMR.
Detailed description
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer related death, with rates being highest in Western countries. Colonoscopy is considered the golden standard in colorectal cancer screening and endoscopic resection of precursor lesions (polyps) has been shown to reduce colorectal cancer death. Polyps extending over 10mm, also referred to as lateral spreading lesions (LSL) if non-pedunculated, more often demonstrate advanced histological features and are considered to be at greater risk for malignant transition as compared to their smaller counterparts. Incomplete endoscopic resection of advanced adenomas may lead to adenoma recurrence and contribute to the development of so called 'interval cancers', which occur during the 6 - 36 month period following complete colonoscopy. Interval cancers account for up to 6% of newly diagnosed CRC cases, highlighting the importance of complete resection.
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a well-established inject and resect method for the removal of LSLs using chromo-gelofusin based submucosal lift and subsequent cauterisation assisted snare excision. Lesions up to 25mm in size may be removed enbloc, whereas larger lesions are generally removed in a piecemeal fashion. Contrary to enbloc resection, piecemeal EMR is historically associated with relatively high recurrence rates of 15-20%. A recent four centre trial led by Westmead Hospital published in gastroenterology (impact factor 20.8) has shown that application of snare-tip soft coag (STSC) to the EMR defect margins considerably improves recurrence rates to around 7% in adenomatous LSL. Common complications of EMR such as intra-procedural bleeding (IPB) or clinically significant post-procedural bleeding (CSPB), deep mural injury (DMI) and post-polypectomy coagulation syndrome (PPCS) are largely related to the use of cauterisation for tissue transection. Although complication rates have improved and effects can often be managed endoscopically, further optimization of the EMR safety profile is needed in the background of an aging target population with multiple co-morbidities and widespread use of anticoagulants.
Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) has become the standard of care for removal of subcentimeter polyps. CSP relies on the use of dedicated stiff thin wire snares that are able to swiftly cut through mucosal tissue without the need for cauterisation, leaving intact the muscularis mucosa and the deeper submucosal layers, virtually excluding the risk of perforation. The absence of delayed cauterisation effect significantly reduces the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding, even in patients on anticoagulant therapy. Complete resection rates of polyps ranging from 6 to 10mm in size were found to be non-inferior in CSP as compared to cauterisation based resection. Moreover, resecting a sufficient margin of normal mucosa surrounding the polyp (i.e. >1mm) yields an excellent 98% complete resection rate in polyps <10mm in size without increasing the risk of delayed bleeding. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly shorter procedure time when applying the cold snare resection technique in small polyps. Snare size limitations of dedicated cold snares however do not allow for en-bloc resection of polyps >10mm.
Recently, cold snare piecemeal EMR was shown to be safe and effective for the removal of large sessile serrated polyps (SSP). Combined evidence from a limited number of small single centre mostly retrospective studies investigating cold snare piecemeal polypectomy in adenomas over 10mm demonstrated recurrence rates of around 11% whilst maintaining an excellent safety profile with minimal complication rates. However, recurrence rates rise to 22% in the subgroup of polyps over 20mm. Thus far cold snare piecemeal polypectomy of lateral-spreading adenomas has not yet been compared to conventional EMR in prospective randomized fashion.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Parallel Assignment
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection | Active comparator | Procedure: Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionConventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), if necessary, to 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas. |
| Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection | Active comparator | Procedure: Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionCold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR), if necessary, to 15-40mm laterally spreading adenomas. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 99 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Any patient undergoing colonoscopy who is older than 18 years of age, has a written consent for trial participation and has at least one LSL meeting to the following description:
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Current use of antiplatelet (excluding aspirin) or anticoagulants which have not appropriately been interrupted according to the guidelines.
- Known bleeding disorder or coagulopathy.
- Pregnancy
- History of inflammatory bowel disease
- Previously attempted or otherwise non-lifting lesions
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionAlso: Conventional EMRUse of injected chromogelofusine solution to raise a lesion prior to polypectomy snare closed over a polyp with electrocautery | Procedure or surgery | Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
| Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionAlso: CSPUse of injected chromogelofusine solution to raise a lesion prior to polypectomy snare closed over a polyp without electrocautery | Procedure or surgery | Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection |
Primary outcome
Complete resection rate
Time frame: 1 day
Complete resection rate (CRR) as determined by endoscopic assessment (no visible residual adenoma) and histological assessment (biopsies of resection margin)
Adenoma recurrence rate
Time frame: 4-6 months
Adenoma recurrence rate (ARR) at SC1 as determined by endoscopic assessment (no visible recurrent adenoma) and histological assessment (scar biopsies)
2 secondary outcomes
Time to perform polypectomy
Time frame: 1 day
Intra-procedural and post-procedural complications
Time frame: 30 days
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Mar 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38964854O'Sullivan T, Cronin O, van Hattem WA, Mandarino FV, Gauci JL, Kerrison C, Whitfield A, Gupta S, Lee E, Williams SJ, Burgess N, Bourke MJ. Cold versus hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection for large (>/=15 mm) flat non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2024 Oct 7;73(11):1823-1830. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2024-332807.
Related trials for Adenoma Colon
Enrolling by invitation
Cold Snare Piecemeal Resection vs Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
Colon Polyp, Colon Adenoma
Enrolling by invitation
Six Versus Twelve Month Index Follow-up After Large Colon Polyp Resection
Colon Polyp, Adenoma
Recruiting
Comparison of Adenoma Detection Rate in 3D vs. 2D Surveillance Colonoscopy
Colonoscopy, Adenoma Detection Rate
Recruiting
Computer-Aided Water Exchange Colonoscopy With and Without Linked-Color Imaging for Detection of Clinically Significant Serrated Lesions
Sessile Colonic Polyp, Serrated Lesion
RecruitingObservational study
GelPOINT® Path-Assisted Endoscopic Removal of Colon and Rectal Polyps: A Feasibility and Safety Study
Polyp Colorectal, Rectal Adenoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michael Bourke, MBBS principal investigator
Western SLHD
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Cold Snare Endoscopic Mucosal Resection in people with Adenoma Colon and Colon Adenoma, run by Western Sydney Local Health District at 1 site in Australia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Australia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Complete resection rate (time frame: 1 day). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04138030, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Mar 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 30 Oct 2026.