Post

New research · Gastroenterology
Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology · 17h
Meta-analysisScandinavian journal of gastroenterology · 2026

Efficacy and safety of cold snare and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection in the removal of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on RCT studies.

Yihang Liu, Yuqing Lu, Kejia Liu … Chaoyang Wang
Read paper
GastroenterologyMeta-analysis

Cold snare mucosal resection had far lower perforation risk than hot snare for colorectal polyps.

Efficacy and safety of cold snare and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection in the removal of colorectal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on RCT studies.

Yihang Liu et al. · Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology · 2026
Purpose

To compare the efficacy and safety of cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection (H-EMR) for colorectal polyps.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from database inception to March 15, 2026.

n = 1466 patients
Results

Perforation (bowel-wall puncture) far less common with cold snare than hot snare removal.

MD -2.30 (95% CI -8.69 to 4.09)
null 0
-8.69
4.09
CI crosses the null - not significant
More results

Overall procedural time showed no significant difference between groups (MD = -2.30 min, 95% CI: -8.69 to 4.09, p = 0.48).

Subgroup analysis revealed C-EMR significantly shortened procedural time for polyps ≤20 mm (MD = -11.53 min, p = 0.004), while H-EMR was faster for polyps >20 mm (MD = 3.89 min, p < 0.001; subgroup interaction p < 0.001).

More results

No significant differences were found in complete resection, en bloc resection, technical success or intraprocedural bleeding rates.

C-EMR had a trend toward higher postoperative recurrence, approaching significance in polyps >20 mm ( p = 0.08).

“
Conclusion · 1 of 2

C-EMR features shorter procedural time and better safety for colorectal polyps ≤20 mm, whereas H-EMR is more suitable for polyps >20 mm.

Conclusion · 2 of 2

Including two landmark 2025 multicenter RCTs, this meta-analysis provides the latest evidence for individualized selection of resection techniques.

Read paper
0 comments

No comments yet. Be the first.

Related papers

LatestFoundational
Cohort Study
13.7%
average total body weight loss for patients with close clinician follow-up
Cohort Study
1.12
slightly higher chance of stomach and gut bleeding, but not a real difference
Cohort Study
62.75%
routine biopsy detected precancerous growths in the intestinal bump for familial adenomatous polyposis patients
Guideline
46
recommendations experts agreed on for treating difficulty emptying bowels
Study
63.3%
More than half of patients saw their pancreatic cancer tumors shrink or disappear
Review
21.5 per 100 000 persons
This is the number of US people with confirmed slow stomach emptying
Cohort Study
13.6%
this low percentage of patients had successful symptom control from the follow-up surgery
Observational
78%
the middle turbinate stayed in a stable position for most patients with the graft