High-definition colonoscopy versus Endocuff versus EndoRings versus full-spectrum endoscopy for adenoma detection at colonoscopy: a multicenter randomized trial

High-definition colonoscopy versus Endocuff versus EndoRings versus full-spectrum endoscopy for adenoma detection at colonoscopy: a multicenter randomized trial

Devices used to improve polyp detection during colonoscopy have seldom been compared with each other. We performed a 3-center prospective randomized trial comparing high-definition (HD) forward-viewing colonoscopy alone to HD with Endocuff to HD with EndoRings to the full spectrum endoscopy (FUSE) s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Gastrointestinal endoscopy Vol. 88; no. 2; pp. 335 - 344.e2
Main Authors: Rex, Douglas K., Repici, Alessandro, Gross, Seth A., Hassan, Cesare, Ponugoti, Prasanna L., Garcia, Jonathan R., Broadley, Heather M., Thygesen, Jack C., Sullivan, Andrew W., Tippins, William W., Main, Samuel A., Eckert, George J., Vemulapalli, Krishna C.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-08-2018
Subjects:
Adenoma - diagnostic imaging
Aged
Cecum
Colonic Polyps - diagnostic imaging
Colonoscopy - instrumentation
Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Female
Humans
Intubation
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Time Factors
FUSE
APC
HD
ADR
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Devices used to improve polyp detection during colonoscopy have seldom been compared with each other. We performed a 3-center prospective randomized trial comparing high-definition (HD) forward-viewing colonoscopy alone to HD with Endocuff to HD with EndoRings to the full spectrum endoscopy (FUSE) system. Patients were age ≥50 years and had routine indications and intact colons. The study colonoscopists were all proven high-level detectors. The primary endpoint was adenomas per colonoscopy (APC). Among 1188 patients who completed the study, APC with Endocuff (APC mean ± standard deviation: 1.82 ± 2.58), EndoRings (1.55 ± 2.42), and standard HD colonoscopy (1.53 ± 2.33) were all higher than FUSE (1.30 ± 1.96; P < .001 for APC). The APC for Endocuff was higher than standard HD colonoscopy (P = .014). Mean cecal insertion times with FUSE (468 ± 311 seconds) and EndoRings (403 ± 263 seconds) were both longer than with Endocuff (354 ± 216 seconds; P = .006 and .018, respectively). For high-level detectors at colonoscopy, forward-viewing HD instruments dominate the FUSE system, indicating that for these examiners image resolution trumps angle of view. Further, Endocuff is a dominant strategy over EndoRings and no mucosal exposure device on a forward-viewing HD colonoscope. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02345889.) [Display omitted]
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-2
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0016-5107
1097-6779
DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2018.02.043