Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosis in the Western world.Aim: To evaluate exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as a non-invasive biomarker for the detection of CRC and precursor lesions using an electronic nose. Methods:In this multicentre study adult colonoscopy patients, without inflammatory bowel disease or (previous) malignancy, were invited for breath analysis. Two-thirds of the breath tests were randomly assigned to develop training models which were used to predict the diagnosis of the remaining patients (external validation). In the end, all data were used to develop final-disease models to further improve the discriminatory power of the algorithms. Results: Five hundred and eleven breath samples were collected. Sixty-four patients were excluded due to an inadequate breath test (n = 51), incomplete colonoscopy (n = 8) or colitis (n = 5). Classification was based on the most advanced lesion found; CRC (n = 70), advanced adenomas (AAs) (n = 117), non-advanced adenoma (n = 117), hyperplastic polyp (n = 15), normal colonoscopy (n = 125). Training models for CRC and AAs had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 and 0.71 and blind validation resulted in an AUC of 0.74 and 0.61 respectively. Final models for CRC and AAs yielded an AUC of 0.84 (sensitivity 95% and specificity 64%) and 0.73 (sensitivity and specificity 79% and 59%) respectively. Conclusions: This study suggests that exhaled VOCs could potentially serve as a noninvasive biomarker for the detection of CRC and AAs. Future studies including more patients could further improve the discriminatory potential of VOC analysis for the detection of (pre-)malignant colorectal lesions. (https ://clini caltr ials.gov Identifier NCT03488537)This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

This feasibility study suggests that the intraprocedural cleaning device appears to be safe and effective in cleaning poorly prepared colons to an adequate level, allowing a thorough colorectal examination.

Background and Aims: High-quality bowel preparation is paramount for the diagnostic accuracy and safety of colonoscopy; however, it is often difficult for patients to adhere to high-volume laxatives, which may contribute to poor bowel preparation. This review aims to assess the efficacy of bowel preparation fluids of 1 L or less (≤1 L).Methods: We performed a systematic review including all relevant randomized controlled trials on ultra-low volume (≤1 L) bowel preparation fluids for colonoscopy published since 2015. Primary endpoint was the percentage of adequately prepared patients. Secondary endpoints included adenoma detection rate (ADR) and safety.Results: Bowel preparation with sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC; 19 trials, n = 10,287), 1L-polyethylene glycol with ascorbate (PEGA; 10 trials, n = 1717), sodium phosphate (NaP; 2 trials, n = 621), and oral sulfate solution (OSS; 3 trials, n = 597) was adequate in 75.2%, 82.9%, 81.9%, and 92.1%, respectively, of patients; however, heterogeneity between studies was considerable (I 2 range: 86-98%). Pooled ADRs were 31.1% with SPMC, 32.3% with 1L-PEGA, 30.4% with NaP, and 40.9% with OSS. Temporary electrolyte changes were seen with all ultra-low volume bowel preparation fluid solutions but without sustained effects in most patients. Conclusion:Ultra-low volume bowel preparation fluids do not always meet the 90% quality standard for adequate bowel preparation as defined by current guidelines. Nonetheless, they may be considered in patients intolerant for higher-volume laxatives and without risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation or dehydration-related complications.

contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Keywords Colorectal cancer I Adenoma detection rate I Adenoma miss rate I Behind folds visualizing technique I Cap-assisted colonoscopy I EndoRings I Endocuff Vision I Extra Wide Angle View (EWAVE) I Full Spectrum Endoscopy (FUSE) I Third Eye Panoramic cap I Third Eye Retroscope I Scope retroflexion I Systematic review I Meta-analysis