Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Endoscopic Procedures II: Colonoscopy01:25

Endoscopic Procedures II: Colonoscopy

562
The colon, or large intestine, is the final segment of the digestive system. Its primary functions include absorbing water and vitamins produced by gut bacteria and transforming waste from liquid to solid to form stool. In adults, the large intestine is approximately 5 feet long and consists of four main sections:
562
Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy01:26

Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy

514
Sigmoidoscopy and laparoscopy are distinct medical procedures that enable physicians to internally inspect different parts of the GI tract. Although they serve different purposes, each is essential for diagnosing and, in some cases, treating various medical conditions.
Sigmoidoscopy
Sigmoidoscopy is a diagnostic procedure that uses a flexible sigmoidoscope equipped with a light source and camera to examine the rectum and sigmoid colon. The procedure involves inserting the tube through the anus...
514

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Conditional knockout of membrane-type I matrix metalloproteinase in smooth muscle cells of adult mice alleviates atherosclerosis without affecting basic cardiovascular function.

Clinical and translational medicine·2026
Same author

Parasitic Persistence: The Diagnostic Challenge of Strongyloidiasis in a Nonendemic Setting.

Gastro hep advances·2026
Same author

Workforce Perception and Awareness of Sustainability in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Systematic Review of Green Endoscopy.

Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology·2026
Same author

Early Versus Delayed Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy After Pancreatic Cancer Surgery: A Real-World Cohort Study.

American journal of clinical oncology·2026
Same author

Gastric Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy Versus Botulinum Toxin Injection for the Treatment of Refractory Gastroparesis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
Same author

Post-ERCP Outcomes in Cirrhotic Patients With Thrombocytopenia: A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Comparative Analysis on TriNetX Health Research Database.

JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 8, 2026

Author Spotlight: A Reproductive Hysteroscopy Approach for Complete Endometrial Polyp Removal and Enhanced Endometrial Receptivity
03:01

Author Spotlight: A Reproductive Hysteroscopy Approach for Complete Endometrial Polyp Removal and Enhanced Endometrial Receptivity

Published on: August 2, 2024

1.7K

Cold Versus Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for ≥15 mm Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Cost-Effectiveness

Sneh Sonaiya1, Dushyant S Dahiya2, Raj Patel3

  • 1Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV.

Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
|December 15, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Cold endoscopic mucosal resection (C-EMR) is more cost-effective than hot endoscopic mucosal resection (H-EMR) for large colorectal polyps (≥15 mm). C-EMR offers comparable effectiveness with fewer adverse events, making it a preferred strategy.

Keywords:
cold resectioncost effectiveness analysisendoscopic mucosal resectionnon-pedunculated colorectal polypspolyp resection

More Related Videos

Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction
08:26

Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction

Published on: March 24, 2023

1.3K
Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System
15:49

Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System

Published on: October 16, 2013

32.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 8, 2026

Author Spotlight: A Reproductive Hysteroscopy Approach for Complete Endometrial Polyp Removal and Enhanced Endometrial Receptivity
03:01

Author Spotlight: A Reproductive Hysteroscopy Approach for Complete Endometrial Polyp Removal and Enhanced Endometrial Receptivity

Published on: August 2, 2024

1.7K
Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction
08:26

Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction

Published on: March 24, 2023

1.3K
Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System
15:49

Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System

Published on: October 16, 2013

32.5K

Area of Science:

  • Gastroenterology
  • Health Economics
  • Medical Technology Assessment

Background:

  • Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is standard for large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs ≥15 mm).
  • Hot EMR (H-EMR) has low recurrence but high delayed postpolypectomy bleeding (DPPB) risk.
  • Cold EMR (C-EMR) has a better safety profile but higher recurrence rates.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing C-EMR and H-EMR for LNPCPs.
  • To evaluate the trade-offs between safety and recurrence rates in managing LNPCPs.

Main Methods:

  • An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a decision tree model.
  • Data were pooled from randomized controlled trials comparing C-EMR and H-EMR.
  • Costs included EMR, delayed bleeding, and hospitalization, derived from CMS data.

Main Results:

  • Analysis included 1516 LNPCPs (766 C-EMR, 750 H-EMR).
  • In the base case, C-EMR was associated with an incremental cost of -$286.67 and an ICER of -$669,448 per QALY.
  • C-EMR was found to be cost-effective compared to H-EMR at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY.

Conclusions:

  • C-EMR is a cost-effective strategy for LNPCPs ≥15 mm compared to H-EMR.
  • H-EMR's lower recurrence rates are offset by higher adverse event costs (DPPB, perforation).
  • C-EMR provides a favorable balance of safety, effectiveness, and cost for LNPCP management.