| [ Summary ] |
In this article, we discuss the merits and demerits of hot forceps polypectomy (HFP, hot biopsy) and cold forceps polypectomy (CFP). These techniques are similar with respect to the ease of retrieval of the resected specimen, difficulty with histopathological assessment, and low en bloc resection rates. The possibility of remnant tissue/recurrence should be considered in patients undergoing CFP with ordinary biopsy forceps. HFP is associated with the risk of adverse events, such as postprocedural bleeding (PPB), delayed perforation, or post‒polypectomy (electro) coagulation syndrome; however, these complications are essentially never observed in patients undergoing CFP. Indications for HFP/CFP should be limited to benign diminutive polyps measuring ≤3 mm in size, and these techniques should not be performed for lesions suspected to be cancerous. Use of a jumbo forceps is recommended when performing CFP. Although the HFP technique is nearly abandoned in routine clinical practice, it may be useful toward the end of piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), or in the treatment of diminutive recurrent lesions, which may occasionally be observed after piecemeal EMR. |