CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT02238938PERLAUpdated Jun 29, 2023

Piecemeal Versus En Bloc Resection of Large Rectal Adenomas

An interventional study of en-bloc resection and piecemeal resection in Colorectal Adenoma With Mild Dysplasia, Colorectal Adenoma With Severe Dysplasia and Colorectal Adenomatous Polyp, sponsored by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf. Terminated at 6 sites in 2 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-06-29.

Sponsored by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was terminated
insufficient recruitment of study patients

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 5 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Apr 2014, registered Sep 2014).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
110
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Currently, colonoscopy is the safest way to detect bowel tumors and polyps, since these can be biopsied and removed in one working process. If the size of adenomas is larger than 2 cm, resections are usually done in a hospital setting. For the resection of large adenomas, different approaches can be used. The so-called piecemeal resection is done with snares, to cut off parts of the adenoma piece by piece until the whole adenoma is resected. This technique is the standard therapy, but is not required for very large adenomas, which can often show cell alterations that indicate cancer. Therefore these adenomas should be resected in one piece. This is done by the so-called en-bloc resection. For this kind of therapy, different endoscopic knifes are use to cut off the adenoma as a whole. Both resection techniques are done usually by previous injection of saline or other liquids to elevate the lesion from its bottom tissue.

Although the piecemeal resection of large adenoma is the standard therapy, it shows recurrence rates of 10 to 25%, which afford repeated therapies and follow up controls. En-bloc resections, though, are expected to have less recurrence rates but are much more complex to perform. They have higher complication rates especially in the West, where it has bee introduced only a couple of years ago.

The data situation regarding safety and efficacy of both therapies is low. This study is the first one ever to compare piecemeal EMR and ESD in a randomized way. The study might have influence on the logistics of future adenoma processing and patient flow.

Read the detailed description

In 20 to 35% of colonoscopies due to symptoms or for prevention polyps, so-called adenoma, are found. Currently, colonoscopy is the best way to detect bowel tumors and polyps, since these can be biopsied and removed in one working process. If the size of adenoma is larger than 2 cm, resections are usually done in a hospital setting. Foremost for flat adenoma, the resection by snares piece by piece, the so-called piecemeal polypectomy, or piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), is state of the art. Resection will usually follow a submucosal saline injection (saline assisted polypectomy). Recurrences occur in 10 up to 25 %, requiring a reapplication of endoscopic therapy and follow up examinations.

Depending on the size of adenoma, increasing amounts of cell alterations of an advanced stage such as high grade dysplasia / intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) up to early cancer are found. In these cases, for histo-pathological and oncological reasons, a resection in a solitary manner (en-bloc resection) is necessary to evaluate the completeness of resection properly. Also, former studies showed that recurrence rate could be decreased considerably by en-bloc resections, since the aim is to perform a complete resection basally and laterally. New endoscopic techniques of en-bloc resections have been introduced since a couple of years, using several endoscopic knifes to cut adenoma down after submucosal injection of liquid and consecutively dissect it from the tissue underneath. This technique is mostly called endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and, with not too large adenoma, can be combined with snare resection, too. The complexity of this method though is much larger than that of snare resection. Therefore, the western success rate is considerably less than in Japan, where it was developed first, and where higher numbers of cases exist in the upper GI tract as well as in the lower GI tract. All in all, the complication rate of en-bloc resection is higher than that of snare resection. Those complications, mostly perforations, are endoscopically controllable in most cases, though.

In comparison with Japan, Korea or China, early malign lesions oft he upper GI tract in the West are rare. Therefore, this study will be conducted on (colo)rectal lesions, which appear much more often in the West.

All in all, for efficacy (resection in total, number of recurrences) and risk (perforations), there is an indistinct data situation between piecemeal resection (EMR) and en-bloc resection (ESD). Up to now, no randomised comparing data exist. The planned study is the first randomised study between ESD and piecemeal EMR at all, since there are no studies been done for the upper GI tract, either. For reasons of complexity, ESD will conceivably remain a method for specialized centers, while piecemeal polypectomies are done in numerous hospitals. Therefore, the outcomes of this study will have influence on future logistics in polypectomies and flow of patients with large colorectal adenoma.

Piecemeal resection will be done by snare following marking and submucosal injection of saline or equivalent liquids. Small leftover adenoma tissue will be resected thoroughly by snare or forceps. High resolution endoscopes are mandatory.

After three months, an Argon plasma coagulation (APC) therapy will follow any piecemeal resection, if necessary, another resection of leftover adenoma will be done. This second session can be done by sigmoidoscopy.

En- bloc resection is done after marking by use of different customary endoscopic knifes including combining devices as hybrid knife to cut down the lesion. After submucosal injection of liquid (saline or equivalent) to elevate the tissue it will be dissected and removed by a snare of adequate size solitarily. Since the aim of this method is the total resection basally and laterally, only one session is intended.

Follow-up care: sigmoidoscopy after 6 and 18 months, colonoscopy after 36 months each after the end of the primary therapy session(s). Diagnostics will be done endoscopically and histologically of at least 6 biopsies if the size of lesion was up to 3 cm, and of at least 10 biopsies for larger lesions.

02

Conditions studied

  • Colorectal Adenoma With Mild Dysplasia
  • Colorectal Adenoma With Severe Dysplasia
  • Colorectal Adenomatous Polyp
  • Colorectal Low Grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia
  • Colorectal High Grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia

Keywords

  • piecemeal polypectomy
  • piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR)
  • endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)
  • endoscopic en-bloc resection
03

In context

Adenoma

657 studies on the registry are indexed under Adenoma; 98 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 110 is below the median of 250 across 412 interventional studies indexed under Adenoma.

Browse Adenoma studies →

Lead sponsor

Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf is the lead sponsor of 403 studies on the registry; 83 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • patients with large non pedunculated colorectal adenomas designated for endoscopic resection up to 15 cm ab ano, length 2 cm to 5 cm, maximum hemicircumferential
  • age > 18 years
  • signed Informed Consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • adenomas smaller or larger than described above
  • more than one large rectal adenoma
  • adenomas with known or suspected carcinoma, proven by previous biopsies
  • adenomas with known or suspected carcinoma that do not seem to be resectable by endoscopy, e.g. ulcers, suspected infiltration of submucosa after endoscopic or ultrasound diagnostics
  • patients with chronic inflammatory bowel diseases
  • severe general disease, including metastasising carcinomas
  • coagulation abnormalities or anticoagulant drug use which make resection therapy impossible
  • bad general state of health (American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification (ASA) IV or more)
  • pregnancy and lactation
  • recurrence or leftover dysplasia after extended endoscopic or surgical therapy (transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM))
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
110 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    en-bloc resection

    En- bloc resection is done after marking by use of different customary endoscopic knifes including combining devices as hybrid knife to cut down the lesion. After submucosal injection of liquid (saline or equivalent) to elevate the tissue it will be dissected and removed by a snare of adequate size solitarily. Since the aim of this method is the total resection basally and laterally, only one session is intended.

    Procedure: en-bloc resection

  • Active comparator
    piecemeal resection

    Piecemeal resection will be done by snare following marking and submucosal injection of saline or equivalent liquids. Small leftover adenoma tissue will be resected thoroughly by snare or forceps. High resolution endoscopes are mandatory. After three months, an APC therapy will follow any piecemeal resection, if necessary, another resection of leftover adenoma will be done. This second session can be done by sigmoidoscopy.

    Procedure: piecemeal resection

Interventions

  • Procedureen-bloc resection

    En- bloc resection after marking by use of different customary endoscopic knifes including combining devices as hybrid knife to cut down the lesion. After submucosal injection of liquid (saline or equivalent) to elevate the tissue it will be dissected and removed by a snare of adequate size solitarily.

    Also known as: endoscopic submucosal dissection, ESD

  • Procedurepiecemeal resection

    Piecemeal resection is done by snare after marking and submucosal injection of saline or equivalent liquids. Small leftover adenoma tissue will be resected thoroughly by snare or forceps. After three months, an APC therapy will follow any piecemeal resection, if necessary, another resection of leftover adenoma will be done.

    Also known as: piecemeal polypectomy, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection, piecemeal EMR

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. success rate of complete resection

    success rate is confirmed by endoscopical diagnostics as well as histological diagnostics (at lest 6 biopsies in lesions up to 3 cm size, at least 10 biopsies in larger lesions). Patients with no complete resection will be treated further according to clinical requirement, depending on histology.

    Time frame: 6 and 18 months after primary therapy

Secondary outcomes

  1. en-bloc group: rate of R0 resections

    This parameter is regarding histopathology. Since piecemeal resections do not allow such a diagnosis, this parameter is only for the en-bloc resected group.

    Time frame: timeline 0, day of en-bloc resection

  2. recurrence rate after complete adenoma resection

    Since early recurrences can evolve from leftover tumor cells and will become manifest after a time, the third control after two controls with negative biopsies.has been chosen to be the gold standard.

    Time frame: 36 months after initial resection

  3. progress of therapy in patients with incomplete resection and recurrences

    patients will be treated further according to treatment standard depending on endoscopical and histological findings

    Time frame: 36 months after initial resection

  4. differences in the subgroups of adenomas

    size, shape according to nice classification, low-grade and high grade intraepithelial adenomas, sm1 carcinomas

    Time frame: 5 years

  5. required time for the initial procedure

    for piecemeal resections including second procedure with APC therapy

    Time frame: timeline 0, day of initial resection

  6. complications including success of complication management

    rate of complications that need intervention, e.g. * perforation (intra - and post procedural, surgery, additional procedures such as antibiotics, monitoring, intensive care * secondary haemorrhage (second look endoscopy, surgery) * infection

    Time frame: 5 years

  7. complications through patient sedation

    depending on sedation standards of the participating centers

    Time frame: timeline 0, day of initial resection

  8. resolution of tumor board for post resections and outcomes of patients with carcinoma histology

    patients with carcinoma histology will be discussed by a of tumor board

    Time frame: 5 years

07

Study locations

6 sites
  • Sana Klinikum Lichtenberg
    Berlin, 10365, Germany
  • Vivantes Wenckebach-Klinikum
    Berlin, 12099, Germany
  • University Hospital Eppendorf
    Hamburg, 20246, Germany
  • St. Bernward Krankenhaus
    Hildesheim, 31134, Germany
  • Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder Regensburg
    Regensburg, 93049, Germany
  • Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust
    Portsmouth, Havant PO9 5NP, United Kingdom
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Risio M. The natural history of colorectal adenomas and early cancer. Pathologe. 2012 Nov;33 Suppl 2:206-10. doi: 10.1007/s00292-012-1640-6. PubMed 22945585 ↗
  • Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Harford WV, Ahnen DJ, Provenzale D, Sontag SJ, Schnell TG, Chejfec G, Campbell DR, Kidao J, Bond JH, Nelson DB, Triadafilopoulos G, Ramirez FC, Collins JF, Johnston TK, McQuaid KR, Garewal H, Sampliner RE, Esquivel R, Robertson D. Five-year colon surveillance after screening colonoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2007 Oct;133(4):1077-85. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.07.006. PubMed 17698067 ↗
  • Saini SD, Kim HM, Schoenfeld P. Incidence of advanced adenomas at surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a personal history of colon adenomas: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Oct;64(4):614-26. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.06.057. PubMed 16996358 ↗
  • Stegeman I, de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, van Leerdam ME, Dekker E, van Ballegooijen M, Kuipers EJ, Fockens P, Kraaijenhagen RA, Bossuyt PM. Colorectal cancer risk factors in the detection of advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 2013 Jun;37(3):278-83. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2013.02.004. Epub 2013 Mar 9. PubMed 23491770 ↗
  • van Heijningen EM, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Kuipers EJ, Dekker E, Lesterhuis W, Ter Borg F, Vecht J, De Jonge V, Spoelstra P, Engels L, Bolwerk CJ, Timmer R, Kleibeuker JH, Koornstra JJ, van Ballegooijen M, Steyerberg EW. Features of adenoma and colonoscopy associated with recurrent colorectal neoplasia based on a large community-based study. Gastroenterology. 2013 Jun;144(7):1410-8. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.03.002. Epub 2013 Mar 7. PubMed 23499951 ↗
  • Jang JH, Balik E, Kirchoff D, Tromp W, Kumar A, Grieco M, Feingold DL, Cekic V, Njoh L, Whelan RL. Oncologic colorectal resection, not advanced endoscopic polypectomy, is the best treatment for large dysplastic adenomas. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Jan;16(1):165-71; discussion 171-2. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1746-9. Epub 2011 Nov 5. PubMed 22058042 ↗
  • Repici A, Hassan C, De Paula Pessoa D, Pagano N, Arezzo A, Zullo A, Lorenzetti R, Marmo R. Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: a systematic review. Endoscopy. 2012 Feb;44(2):137-50. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1291448. Epub 2012 Jan 23. PubMed 22271024 ↗
  • Farhat S, Chaussade S, Ponchon T, Coumaros D, Charachon A, Barrioz T, Koch S, Houcke P, Cellier C, Heresbach D, Lepilliez V, Napoleon B, Bauret P, Coron E, Le Rhun M, Bichard P, Vaillant E, Calazel A, Bensoussan E, Bellon S, Mangialavori L, Robin F, Prat F; SFED ESD study group. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in a European setting. A multi-institutional report of a technique in development. Endoscopy. 2011 Aug;43(8):664-70. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256413. Epub 2011 May 27. PubMed 21623560 ↗
  • Probst A, Pommer B, Golger D, Anthuber M, Arnholdt H, Messmann H. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in gastric neoplasia - experience from a European center. Endoscopy. 2010 Dec;42(12):1037-44. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1255668. Epub 2010 Oct 22. PubMed 20972955 ↗
  • Ribeiro-Mourao F, Pimentel-Nunes P, Dinis-Ribeiro M. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric lesions: results of an European inquiry. Endoscopy. 2010 Oct;42(10):814-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1255778. Epub 2010 Sep 30. PubMed 20886399 ↗
  • Neuhaus H, Terheggen G, Rutz EM, Vieth M, Schumacher B. Endoscopic submucosal dissection plus radiofrequency ablation of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus. Endoscopy. 2012 Dec;44(12):1105-13. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1310155. Epub 2012 Sep 11. PubMed 22968641 ↗
  • Probst A, Golger D, Anthuber M, Markl B, Messmann H. Endoscopic submucosal dissection in large sessile lesions of the rectosigmoid: learning curve in a European center. Endoscopy. 2012 Jul;44(7):660-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1309403. Epub 2012 Apr 23. PubMed 22528673 ↗
  • Adler A, Roll S, Marowski B, Drossel R, Rehs HU, Willich SN, Riese J, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T; Berlin Private-Practice Gastroenterology Working Group. Appropriateness of colonoscopy in the era of colorectal cancer screening: a prospective, multicenter study in a private-practice setting (Berlin Colonoscopy Project 1, BECOP 1). Dis Colon Rectum. 2007 Oct;50(10):1628-38. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9029-y. PubMed 17694415 ↗
  • Redaelli A, Cranor CW, Okano GJ, Reese PR. Screening, prevention and socioeconomic costs associated with the treatment of colorectal cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(17):1213-38. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200321170-00001. PubMed 14986736 ↗
  • Soerjomataram I, Lortet-Tieulent J, Parkin DM, Ferlay J, Mathers C, Forman D, Bray F. Global burden of cancer in 2008: a systematic analysis of disability-adjusted life-years in 12 world regions. Lancet. 2012 Nov 24;380(9856):1840-50. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60919-2. Epub 2012 Oct 16. PubMed 23079588 ↗
  • van den Broek FJ, de Graaf EJ, Dijkgraaf MG, Reitsma JB, Haringsma J, Timmer R, Weusten BL, Gerhards MF, Consten EC, Schwartz MP, Boom MJ, Derksen EJ, Bijnen AB, Davids PH, Hoff C, van Dullemen HM, Heine GD, van der Linde K, Jansen JM, Mallant-Hent RC, Breumelhof R, Geldof H, Hardwick JC, Doornebosch PG, Depla AC, Ernst MF, van Munster IP, de Hingh IH, Schoon EJ, Bemelman WA, Fockens P, Dekker E. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal adenomas (TREND-study). BMC Surg. 2009 Mar 13;9:4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2482-9-4. PubMed 19284647 ↗
  • Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF, Brown G, Tam W, Singh R, Zanati S, Chen RY, Byth K. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2011 Jun;140(7):1909-18. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.062. Epub 2011 Mar 8. PubMed 21392504 ↗
  • Kim HH, Kim JH, Park SJ, Park MI, Moon W. Risk factors for incomplete resection and complications in endoscopic mucosal resection for lateral spreading tumors. Dig Endosc. 2012 Jul;24(4):259-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01232.x. Epub 2012 Feb 7. PubMed 22725112 ↗
  • Kobayashi N, Yoshitake N, Hirahara Y, Konishi J, Saito Y, Matsuda T, Ishikawa T, Sekiguchi R, Fujimori T. Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Apr;27(4):728-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06942.x. PubMed 22004124 ↗
  • Ahlawat SK, Gupta N, Benjamin SB, Al-Kawas FH. Large colorectal polyps: endoscopic management and rate of malignancy: does size matter? J Clin Gastroenterol. 2011 Apr;45(4):347-54. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e3181f3a2e0. PubMed 20871408 ↗
  • Ah Soune P, Menard C, Salah E, Desjeux A, Grimaud JC, Barthet M. Large endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors exceeding 4 cm. World J Gastroenterol. 2010 Feb 7;16(5):588-95. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i5.588. PubMed 20128027 ↗
  • Hurlstone DP, Sanders DS, Cross SS, George R, Shorthouse AJ, Brown S. A prospective analysis of extended endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal villous adenomas: an alternative technique to transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Colorectal Dis. 2005 Jul;7(4):339-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00813.x. PubMed 15932555 ↗
  • Pigot F, Bouchard D, Mortaji M, Castinel A, Juguet F, Chaume JC, Faivre J. Local excision of large rectal villous adenomas: long-term results. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003 Oct;46(10):1345-50. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6748-1. PubMed 14530673 ↗
  • Doniec JM, Lohnert MS, Schniewind B, Bokelmann F, Kremer B, Grimm H. Endoscopic removal of large colorectal polyps: prevention of unnecessary surgery? Dis Colon Rectum. 2003 Mar;46(3):340-8. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6553-x. PubMed 12626909 ↗
  • Pohl H, Srivastava A, Bensen SP, Anderson P, Rothstein RI, Gordon SR, Levy LC, Toor A, Mackenzie TA, Rosch T, Robertson DJ. Incomplete polyp resection during colonoscopy-results of the complete adenoma resection (CARE) study. Gastroenterology. 2013 Jan;144(1):74-80.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.09.043. Epub 2012 Sep 25. Erratum In: Gastroenterology. 2021 Oct;161(4):1347. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.08.018. PubMed 23022496 ↗
  • Rosch T, Sarbia M, Schumacher B, Deinert K, Frimberger E, Toermer T, Stolte M, Neuhaus H. Attempted endoscopic en bloc resection of mucosal and submucosal tumors using insulated-tip knives: a pilot series. Endoscopy. 2004 Sep;36(9):788-801. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-825838. PubMed 15326574 ↗
  • Neuhaus H, Costamagna G, Deviere J, Fockens P, Ponchon T, Rosch T; ARCADE Group. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of early neoplastic gastric lesions using a new double-channel endoscope (the "R-scope"). Endoscopy. 2006 Oct;38(10):1016-23. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-944830. PubMed 17058167 ↗
  • Adler A, Wegscheider K, Lieberman D, Aminalai A, Aschenbeck J, Drossel R, Mayr M, Mross M, Scheel M, Schroder A, Gerber K, Stange G, Roll S, Gauger U, Wiedenmann B, Altenhofen L, Rosch T. Factors determining the quality of screening colonoscopy: a prospective study on adenoma detection rates, from 12,134 examinations (Berlin colonoscopy project 3, BECOP-3). Gut. 2013 Feb;62(2):236-41. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300167. Epub 2012 Mar 22. PubMed 22442161 ↗
  • Adler A, Aminalai A, Aschenbeck J, Drossel R, Mayr M, Scheel M, Schroder A, Yenerim T, Wiedenmann B, Gauger U, Roll S, Rosch T. Latest generation, wide-angle, high-definition colonoscopes increase adenoma detection rate. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Feb;10(2):155-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.10.026. Epub 2011 Nov 2. PubMed 22056301 ↗
  • Adler A, Aschenbeck J, Yenerim T, Mayr M, Aminalai A, Drossel R, Schroder A, Scheel M, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. Narrow-band versus white-light high definition television endoscopic imaging for screening colonoscopy: a prospective randomized trial. Gastroenterology. 2009 Feb;136(2):410-6.e1; quiz 715. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.10.022. Epub 2008 Oct 15. PubMed 19014944 ↗
  • Adler A, Pohl H, Papanikolaou IS, Abou-Rebyeh H, Schachschal G, Veltzke-Schlieker W, Khalifa AC, Setka E, Koch M, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. A prospective randomised study on narrow-band imaging versus conventional colonoscopy for adenoma detection: does narrow-band imaging induce a learning effect? Gut. 2008 Jan;57(1):59-64. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.123539. Epub 2007 Aug 6. PubMed 17681999 ↗
  • Pohl H, Aschenbeck J, Drossel R, Schroder A, Mayr M, Koch M, Rothe K, Anders M, Voderholzer W, Hoffmann J, Schulz HJ, Liehr RM, Gottschalk U, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. Endoscopy in Barrett's oesophagus: adherence to standards and neoplasia detection in the community practice versus hospital setting. J Intern Med. 2008 Oct;264(4):370-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2008.01977.x. Epub 2008 May 15. PubMed 18482289 ↗
  • Meining A, Ott R, Becker I, Hahn S, Muhlen J, Werner M, Hofler H, Classen M, Heldwein W, Rosch T. The Munich Barrett follow up study: suspicion of Barrett's oesophagus based on either endoscopy or histology only--what is the clinical significance? Gut. 2004 Oct;53(10):1402-7. doi: 10.1136/gut.2003.036822. PubMed 15361485 ↗
  • Heldwein W, Dollhopf M, Rosch T, Meining A, Schmidtsdorff G, Hasford J, Hermanek P, Burlefinger R, Birkner B, Schmitt W; Munich Gastroenterology Group. The Munich Polypectomy Study (MUPS): prospective analysis of complications and risk factors in 4000 colonic snare polypectomies. Endoscopy. 2005 Nov;37(11):1116-22. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870512. PubMed 16281142 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 29, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02238938
Lead sponsor
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
Responsible party
Prof. Dr. Thomas Rösch (Clinical Director, Department of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 12, 2014
Start date
Apr 2014
Primary completion
May 30, 2021
Completion
May 30, 2022
Last update
Jun 29, 2023

Study contacts

Thomas Rösch, Prof. Dr.
study chair · University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Jun 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion