No allergic reactions were observed in either case. In Group 1, no additional endoscopic hemostasis methods were necessary to stop bleeding, the technique efficiency was 100%. In Group 2, additional hemostasis methods were used in 8 (61.53%) cases: clipping in 5 (38.46%) cases, clipping with coagulation with clip forceps, in 1 (7.69%) case, spark ball hemostasis, in 1 (7.69%) case and loop coagulation of the bleeding vessel, in 1 (7.69%) case. The comparative analysis suggested that additional endoscopic hemostatic methods (F=0.00552, p<0.05) were statistically more frequently administered in Group 2. The need for additional hemostasis did not depend on the polypectomy method: cold excision method (F=0.59207, p>0.05), one-stage electroexcision (F=0.55944, p>0.05) or fragment-by-fragment mucosectomy (F=0.19231, p>0.05). The visualization of the bleeding source and the wound defect boundaries was not affected in 8 (61.53%) cases (Group 2) that required additional hemostasis after initial drug irrigation, which enabled to administer additional hemostatic methods efficiently in 100% cases.