Higher adenoma detection rate with the endocuff: a randomized trial

Abstract Background and study aim Different techniques have been introduced to improve the endoscopist’s view and enhance the detection of polyps. The endocuff is a polymer sleeve cap that is connected to the tip of the colonoscope in order to improve visualization of the mucosa during colonoscopy. The aim of the study was to compare adenoma detection rates (ADR) of endocuff-assisted colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patients and methods Patients 50 years or older were randomized into two groups: an endocuff-assisted colonoscopy group and a conventional colonoscopy group without the endocuff. Results A total of 337 patients were included: 174 in the endocuff group and 163 in the conventional group. The median age was 61 years (interquartile range 55 – 70 years), and 74 % were women. The ADR was higher in the endocuff group than in the conventional group (22.4 % vs. 13.5 %; P = 0.02). The mean number of adenomas was 0.30 (SD 0.25) in the endocuff group and 0.21 (SD 0.26) in the conventional group (P = 0.02). The rate of ileal intubation was lower in the endocuff group (73 % vs. 87 %; P < 0.001). No serious adverse events occurred with the use of the endocuff. Conclusions Endocuff colonoscopy achieved a greater ADR than conventional colonoscopy.Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC02387593).

Download Full-text

Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy is associated with a lower adenoma miss rate: a multicenter randomized tandem study

Endoscopy ◽

10.1055/s-0043-114412 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 49 (11) ◽

pp. 1051-1060 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

Konstantinos Triantafyllou ◽

Dimitrios Polymeros ◽

Periklis Apostolopoulos ◽

Catarina Lopes Brandao ◽

Paraskevas Gkolfakis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Proximal Colon ◽

Conventional Colonoscopy ◽

Advanced Adenoma ◽

Serious Adverse Events ◽

Colon Adenoma ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Index Procedure ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates ◽

Medical Design

Abstract Background and study aims The Endocuff (ARC Medical Design, Leeds, UK) is a device that, when mounted on the tip of an endoscope, may assist with inspection of a greater surface of the colonic mucosa by pulling backwards, flattening, and stretching the colonic folds as the endoscope is gradually withdrawn. We aimed to compare the adenoma miss rates of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy with those of conventional colonoscopy. Patients and methods The included patients underwent same-day, back-to-back, (Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy as the index procedure followed by conventional colonoscopy or vice versa, randomly assigned 1:1) colonoscopies, performed by six endoscopists with documented adenoma detection rates > 35 %, in four tertiary endoscopy facilities. Results We randomized 200 patients (mean age 61.2 years [standard deviation 9.8]; 86.5 % colorectal cancer screening surveillance cases). Overall, there were seven incomplete examinations using Endocuff and one with conventional colonoscopy (P = 0.03). Times for endoscope insertion (5.0 minutes [0.8 – 21.0] vs. 5.0 minutes [1.0 – 16.0]; P = 0.49) and withdrawal (6.0 minutes [3.2 – 29.0] vs. 6.0 minutes [3.1 – 17.0]; P = 0.06) were similar for Endocuff-assisted and conventional colonoscopy. We detected one cancer and 195 adenomas; 84 in the proximal colon. Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy showed significantly lower overall and proximal colon adenoma miss rates compared with conventional colonoscopy (14.7 % [8.0 % – 21.0 %] vs. 38.4 % [28.1 % – 48.6 %] and 10.4 % [1.8 % – 19.1 %] vs. 38.9 % [23.0 % – 54.8 %], respectively). No difference between the two arms was shown regarding advanced adenoma miss rates, either overall or in the proximal colon. There were no serious adverse events related to the procedures. Conclusions In comparison with conventional colonoscopy, Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy has a significantly lower adenoma miss rate when performed by high-detector endoscopists. However, the incomplete colonoscopy rate with Endocuff is higher.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02340065.

Download Full-text

Effect of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy on adenoma detection rate: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Endoscopy ◽

10.1055/a-0577-3500 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 50 (09) ◽

pp. 846-860 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

Nicolas Williet ◽

Quentin Tournier ◽

Chloé Vernet ◽

Olivier Dumas ◽

Leslie Rinaldi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Detection Rate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adenoma Detection Rate ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Standard Colonoscopy

Abstract Background Yield of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) compared with standard colonoscopy is conflicting in terms of adenoma detection rate (ADR). A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) appears necessary. Methods PubMed and Google Scholar were searched in December 2017. Abstracts from Digestive Disease Week and United European Gastroenterology Week meetings were also searched to 2017. All RCTs comparing EAC with standard colonoscopy were included. Analysis was conducted by using the Mantel–Haenszel models. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 test. Results Of the 265 articles reviewed, 12 RCTs were included, with a total of 8376 patients (EAC group 4225; standard colonoscopy group 4151). In the meta-analysis, ADR was significantly increased in the EAC group vs. the standard colonoscopy group (41.3 % vs. 34.2 %; risk ratio [RR] = 1.20, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.36; P = 0.003; I 2 = 79 %), especially for operators with low-to-moderate ADRs (< 35 %): RR = 1.51, 95 %CI 1.35 to 1.69; P < 0.001; I 2 = 43 %). In contrast, this benefit was not reached for operators with high ADRs (> 45 %): RR = 1.01, 95 %CI 0.93 to 1.09; P = 0.87; I 2 = 0.0 %). The mean number of adenomas per patient tended to be higher with EAC (mean difference = 0.11 adenomas/patient, 95 %CI – 0.17 to 0.38). Similar results were shown for polyp detection rates (61.6 % vs. 51.4 %; RR = 1.20, 95 %CI 1.06 to 1.36; P = 0.004). Use of the Endocuff did not impact the cecal intubation rate (95.1 % vs. 95.7 %; P = 0.08), or the procedure time compared with standard colonoscopy. Adverse events related to Endocuff were rare and exclusively mild mucosal erosion (4.0 %; 95 %CI 2.0 % to 8.0 %). Conclusion With moderate-quality evidence, this study showed an improvement in ADR with EAC without major adverse events, especially for operators with low-to-moderate ADRs.

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

Long-term performance of colorectal cancer screening programmes based on the faecal immunochemical test

Gut ◽

10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314753 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 67 (12) ◽

pp. 2124-2130 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Manuel Zorzi ◽

Cesare Hassan ◽

Giulia Capodaglio ◽

Chiara Fedato ◽

Adriana Montaguti ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Detection Rate ◽

Advanced Adenoma ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates ◽

Immunochemical Test ◽

Long Term Performance ◽

Term Performance

BackgroundThe long-term performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes based on a 2-year faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is still unclear.MethodsIn a sample of 50 to 69-year-olds repeatedly screened with the FIT (OC-Hemodia latex agglutination test; cut-off: 20 µg haemoglobin/g faeces), we examined: (1) the FIT positivity rate, the CRC and advanced adenoma detection rate and the FIT’s positive predictive value (PPV) for advanced neoplasia, at each round of screening and (2) the cumulative CRC and advanced adenoma detection rate after five rounds of FIT.ResultsOver 12 years (2002–2014), 123 347 individuals were administered the FIT up to six times, and 781 CRCs and 4713 advanced adenomas were diagnosed. The CRC and advanced adenoma detection rates declined substantially from the first to the third (rate ratio (RR) 0.25, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.32) and second (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.56) rounds, respectively, and then remained stable. The PPV for advanced neoplasia dropped by 18% in the second round (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.89), with no further reduction thereafter due to a concomitant decline in the FIT positivity rate (RR first to sixth rounds: 0.56, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60).The cumulative CRC and advanced adenoma detection rates over five consecutive rounds were 8.5‰ (95% CI 7.8 to 9.2), and 58.9‰ (95% CI 56.9 to 61.0), respectively.ConclusionsRepeated FIT significantly reduces the burden of colorectal disease while facilitating an efficient use of colonoscopy resources. The cumulative detection rate after five rounds of FIT is similar to primary screening with colonoscopy, supporting the need to account for the cumulative sensitivity of repeated FITs when evaluating the test’s efficacy.

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Compared Abilities of Endoscopic Techniques to Increase Colon Adenoma Detection Rates: A Network Meta-analysis.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.734614921.793562099 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Edward Seward

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Colon Adenoma ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Endoscopic Techniques ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Adenoma Detection Rates

Download Full-text

Comparison of colonoscopy after colonic diverticulitis and positive fecal immunochemical tests for the detection of colorectal neoplasia

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/a-1333-1108 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 09 (03) ◽

pp. E331-E337

Author(s):

Dai Nakamatsu ◽

Tsutomu Nishida ◽

Shinji Kuriki ◽

Li-sa Chang ◽

Kazuki Aochi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Detection Rate ◽

Colorectal Neoplasia ◽

Acute Diverticulitis ◽

Colonic Diverticulitis ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Positive Group ◽

Asymptomatic Patients ◽

Polyp Detection Rate ◽

Adenoma Detection ◽

Acute Colonic Diverticulitis

Abstract Background and study aims The relationship between acute colonic diverticulitis and colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear, but colonoscopy is recommended to exclude malignancy. We compared the detection rates for colorectal neoplasia in patients with colonic diverticulitis and asymptomatic patients who had positive fecal immunochemical tests (FITs). Patients and methods In total, 282 patients with acute colonic diverticulitis were hospitalized in our hospital from February 2011 to December 2019. Of them, 143 patients with diverticulitis and 1819 with positive FITs patients during the same period underwent colonoscopy without a prior colonoscopy within 5 years. We retrospectively compared these patients in terms of the invasive CRC rate, advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), adenoma detection rate (ADR), and polyp detection rate (PDR). Results Compared to the diverticulitis group, the FIT-positive group had a significantly higher CRC rate (0 vs 2.7 %, P = 0.0061), ANDR (5.6 vs. 14.0 %, P = 0.0017), ADR (19.6 vs. 53.2 %, P < .0001), and PDR (44.1 vs. 91.0 %, P < .0001). Using 1:1 propensity score matching based on age and sex, we obtained 276 matched patients in both groups. After matching, no difference was found in the CRC rate (0 vs 0.7 %) or ANDR (5.8 vs 7.3 %) between groups, but the ADR and PDR were significantly higher in the FIT-positive group (20.3 vs 43.5 %, P < .0001; 45.7 % vs 86.2 %, P < .0001). Conclusion Patients with acute diverticulitis had lower ADRs and PDRs than patients with positive FITs.

Download Full-text