Endoscopic Improvement of the Adenoma Detection Rate during Colonoscopy - Where Do We Stand in 2015?

Floer, Martin; Meister, Tobias

doi:10.1159/000442464

Cited by 238 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 127 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first‐generation EndoCuff has two rows of branches, which help to flattern the folds of the colorectal mucosa that allows for an improved visibility behind the folds. While the second‐generation device has only one row of longer and smoother branches in order to decrease mucosal scratches . Although many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted, it is still uncertain whether EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy (EAC) could improve ADR.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the secondgeneration device has only one row of longer and smoother branches in order to decrease mucosal scratches. 10,11 Although many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted, it is still uncertain whether EndoCuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) could improve ADR. Floer et al 12 performed a prospective multicenter randomized trial including 500 patients and indicated that EAC improved ADR more significantly than standard colonoscopy (SC) (35.4% vs 20.7%, P < 0.001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy could improve adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Jian

Feng

Zhang

et al. 2019

J of Digest Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This meta‐analysis aimed to evaluate whether EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy (EAC) could improve adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with standard colonoscopy (SC). Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published up to March 2019. All pure randomized controlled trials comparing ADR between EAC and SC groups were included. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain the odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas continuous data were pooled using a mean difference with 95% CI. Review Manager Version 5.3 was used for data analysis. Results Thirteen randomized controlled trials consisting of 9038 patients (EAC: 4574; SC: 4464) were included. The EAC group showed significant superiority over the SC group in ADR (odds ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.15–1.62). However, there were no differences between the EAC and SC groups in adverse events, cecal intubation rate, and cecal intubation time. Conclusions EAC could significantly improve ADR without increasing adverse events, especially for operators with low ADRs. In addition, no significant difference was observed in cecal intubation time and cecal intubation rate between EAC and SC.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy could improve adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Jian

Feng

Zhang

et al. 2019

J of Digest Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Surveillance EGD in FAP patients without sideviewing duodenoscope is feasible when using FUSE EGD. Furthermore, FUSE colonoscopy has been shown to reduce adenoma miss rates [22][23][24][25][26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Full-Spectrum Endoscopy to Visualize the Major Duodenal Papilla in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

Ichijima¹,

Abe²,

Kobayashi³

et al. 2019

Digestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims: Duodenal cancer is one of the extracolonic malignancies with known mortality in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients. Visualization of the major duodenal papilla (MDP) with a standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is currently insufficient because of the limited field of view. Full-spectrum endoscopy (FUSE), utilizing double imagers located on the front and side of the endoscopic tip, provides a wider field of view up to 245 degrees. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of FUSE in visualizing MDP in patients with FAP. Methods: This study was a single-center retrospective study including 49 FAP patients undergoing surveillance at our institution. EGD was performed by qualified endoscopists using FUSE, and visibility of the MDP was evaluated. All examinations were video-recorded, and the clips for individual patient were edited to forward view images alone (conventional group) and 2-view images of the duodenum (forward and side-view [FUSE group]). Three other qualified external endoscopists independently reviewed the videos and compared the visibility of MDP between the conventional and the FUSE groups. Primary endpoint was the rate of Type 1 visibility (whole area of the papilla) in off-site video reviews. We also assessed MDP visibility on-site as secondary endpoint. Results: The rate of type 1 MDP visibility was significantly higher in the FUSE group than conventional group in both on-site (32.6/100%, p < 0.001) and off-site reviews (8.2, 16.3, 14.3/100, 98, and 100%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: FUSE is recommended in screening and surveillance EGD to better visualize MDP in FAP patients.

show abstract

“…Examples are back to back colonoscopy, retroflexion, transparent cap-assisted colonoscopy, and special devices such as the EndoCuff (Arc Medical Ltd., Leeds, UK) and the EndoRings (Endo-Aid, Caesarea, Israel) [23][24][25]. All of these improvements using WLI observation are influenced by the settings of structure enhancement and CE settings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Enhancement Settings for White Light Observation Improves Colorectal Polyp Visibility in Color Difference Value and an Endoscopist’s Visibility

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: Settings of structure and color enhancement (CE) change view of white light imaging and a preset low enhancement setting is used regularly. The aim of this study was to investigate whether higher enhancement settings increased colorectal lesions’ visibility with endoscopists’ visibility scoring and objective color difference (CD) value. Methods: From April 2015 to September 2015, we analyzed 27 pictures and 100 videos of colorectal lesions. Combinations of structure enhancement (B3, A3, A5) and CE (CE 0, 1, 3) were evaluated and CD values of 2 corresponding modes (high enhancement: A5 + CE3, preset low enhancement: A3 + CE0) were calculated using marketed software. In the video, these 2 modes were evaluated. All pictures and movies were graded by 4 endoscopists using visibility scores: score 4 (excellent) to score 1 (poor). Results: The scores of A3 + CE0 (2.74 ± 1.09) were significantly lower than those of all other higher enhancement settings such as B3 + CE1 (3.11 ± 1.08), A3 + CE1 (3.33 ± 0.91), and A5 + CE3 (3.56 ± 0.74; p < 0.001). The CD value of A5 + CE3 was significantly higher than A3 + CE0 (20.2 ± 6.9 vs. 12.9 ± 5.6, p < 0.001). In the video, the scores for A5 + CE3 were significantly higher than A3 + CE0 (3.27 ± 0.83 vs. 2.53 ± 1.05, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Higher enhancement settings increased visibility of colorectal lesions.

show abstract

Endoscopic Improvement of the Adenoma Detection Rate during Colonoscopy - Where Do We Stand in 2015?

Cited by 238 publications

References 127 publications

EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy could improve adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy could improve adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Efficacy of Full-Spectrum Endoscopy to Visualize the Major Duodenal Papilla in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

High Enhancement Settings for White Light Observation Improves Colorectal Polyp Visibility in Color Difference Value and an Endoscopist’s Visibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About