Effect of simply recording colonoscopy withdrawal time on polyp and adenoma detection rates

Abstract Background Cap-assisted colonoscopy is frequently used to facilitate adenoma detection during endoscopy. However, data on how cap assistance influences polyp resection are scarce. We aimed to evaluate the impact of cap assistance with the Endocuff vision device (EVD) on the resection time for colorectal polyps in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Methods A randomized, prospective study was performed in a university hospital in Germany. A total of 250 patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to undergo either colonoscopy with the EVD (EVD arm) or standard colonoscopy without the use of a cap (standard arm). The primary outcome was the average duration of polypectomy. Secondary outcomes included adenoma detection rate, cecal and ileal intubation times, and propofol dosage. Results The use of EVD led to a significant reduction in the median polypectomy time in the EVD vs. standard arm (54 vs. 80 seconds, respectively; P = 0.02). This effect was strongest for polyps ≥ 6 mm. Compared with the standard group, Endocuff assistance also resulted in a shorter cecal intubation time (6 vs. 8 minutes; P = 0.03) and overall colonoscopy time (23 vs. 27 minutes; P = 0.02). In contrast, no difference in withdrawal time was observed. The polyp and adenoma detection rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. Conclusion Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy reduces the duration of polypectomy, which may be due to a more stable scope position during resection. Further studies are needed to investigate whether comparable effects will be seen for other interventions, such as clipping or biopsy sampling.

Download Full-text

Comparison of colon adenoma detection rates using cap-assisted and Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-0996-7891 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 07 (12) ◽

pp. E1585-E1591 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Joseph Marsano ◽

Sheeva Johnson ◽

Stephanie Yan ◽

Latifat Alli-Akintade ◽

Machelle Wilson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Polyp Size ◽

Withdrawal Time ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Patient Demographics ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates

Abstract Objectives and study aim Colonoscopy prevents colorectal cancer by removing adenomatous polyps, but missed adenomas lead to interval cancers. Different devices have been used to increase adenoma detection rates (ADR). Two such devices of interest are the transparent cap (Olympus) and Endocuff (ARC Medical). Our study aimed to compare differences in ADR between Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC), cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) and standard colonoscopy (SC). Patients and methods A sample size of 126 subjects was calculated to determine an effect size of 30 %. Patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy between March 2016 and January 2017 were randomized to SC, CAC or EAC groups. Three experienced endoscopists performed all colonoscopies. Patient demographics, procedure indication, Boston Bowel Prep Score (BBPS), withdrawal time, polyp size, location, histopathology, were analyzed. Results There was no difference in ADR (52 %, 40 % and 54 %) in the SC, CAC and EAC groups respectively (P = 0.4). Similar findings were also observed for proximal ADR (45 %, 35 %, and 50 %, P = 0.4) and SSA detection rate (16 %, 14 %, and 23 %, P = 0.5). EAC detected higher mean ADR per colonoscopy compared to CAC (1.70 vs 0.76, P = 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in mean ADR per positive colonoscopy (2.08, 1.63, and 2.59, P = 0.21). Conclusion In a randomized controlled trial comparing AC to CAC and SC, neither device conferred additional benefits in ADR among high detectors. When comparing each device, EAC may be better than CAC at detecting more total adenomas.

Download Full-text

Colonoscopy withdrawal time and adenoma detection rates for trainees

Surgical Endoscopy ◽

10.1007/s00464-012-2723-4 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 27 (6) ◽

pp. 2243-2244

Author(s):

Shailendra Singh

Keyword(s):

Withdrawal Time ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates

Download Full-text

Withdrawal time of 8 minutes is associated with higher adenoma detection rates in surveillance colonoscopy after surgery for colorectal cancer

Surgical Endoscopy ◽

10.1007/s00464-020-07653-x ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Da Hyun Jung ◽

Ja In Lee ◽

Cheal Wung Huh ◽

Min Jae Kim ◽

Young Hoon Youn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Surveillance Colonoscopy ◽

Withdrawal Time ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates

Download Full-text

The Impact of Colonoscopy Quality Control Table on Adenoma Detection Rates

Gastroenterology Research and Practice ◽

10.1155/2016/2548109 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2016 ◽

pp. 1-7 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Bin Deng ◽

Jiehua Zhi ◽

Yaosheng Chen ◽

Lanyu Liang ◽

Jian Wu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Success Rate ◽

Detection Rate ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Withdrawal Time ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates ◽

Colonoscopy Quality ◽

The Impact

Objective. This study aims to investigate the effects of reporting colonoscopy findings and the regular review of outcomes on adenoma detection rates.Methods. Patients who underwent colonoscopy from August 2013 to February 2014 were selected as the intervention group. The preintervention group included patients who underwent colonoscopy from January 2013 to July 2013, in which the procedure sheet for this group of patients was not accomplished. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes included the success rate of intubation and withdrawal time.Results. This study included 2,467 cases: 1,302 cases in the intervention group and 1,165 cases in the preintervention group. There was no significant difference in demographic characteristics between the two groups. In the intervention group, withdrawal time of colonoscopy was longer (P<0.01), and the success rate of intubation (92.5% versus 89.1%,P<0.05) and detection rate of polyps (32.6% versus 27.6%,P<0.05) and adenomas (20.0% versus 16.1%,P<0.05) were higher. Significantly high detection rates for proximal adenomas, flat adenomas, and adenomas with a diameter <5 mm were observed in the intervention group (allP<0.01).Conclusion. The reporting and review of procedure details help to improve quality indicators of colonoscopy.

Download Full-text