← Issue №13/ week of Sep 27, 2026/Endoscopy

Underwater versus conventional polypectomy for colorectal polyps 10 mm or smaller: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

From GI Signals issue №13: what this paper found, what it changes, and where it sits against the current standard of care, reviewed by Simon Mathews, MD.

Endoscopy meta analysis · n=1,166 · Sep 22, 2026 · Eur J Gastro Hep · IF 2.2

Underwater versus conventional polypectomy for colorectal polyps 10 mm or smaller: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

New evidencepolypectomysystematic reviewmeta-analysisendoscopy quality
Clinical takeawayConsider underwater polypectomy for polyps ≤10 mm to reduce incomplete resection rates, particularly in settings where complete resection is critical, such as surveillance for high-risk adenomas or serrated lesions.
What it foundUnderwater polypectomy reduced incomplete resection rates to 38% of conventional polypectomy (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25-0.56) for polyps ≤10 mm, with comparable en bloc resection rates and safety profiles.
ContextConfirms underwater polypectomy as a viable alternative to conventional polypectomy, with a specific advantage in reducing incomplete resections while maintaining comparable safety and en bloc resection rates.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Amdetsion GY … Abegunde AT · European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · IF 2.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Read the whole of issue №13 Every paper GI Signals surfaces gets a page like this one. All issues