Higher adenoma detection rate with the endocuff: a randomized trial

Coty González-Fernández; David García-Rangel; Nancy Edith Aguilar-Olivos; Rafael Barreto-Zúñiga; Adriana Fabiola Romano-Munive; Guido Grajales-Figueroa; Luis Eduardo Zamora-Nava; Félix Ignacio Téllez-Avila

doi:10.1055/s-0043-117879

Endoscopy, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Endoscopy 2017; 49(11): 1061-1068
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-117879

Original article

Higher adenoma detection rate with the endocuff: a randomized trial

Coty González-Fernández

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

David García-Rangel

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Nancy Edith Aguilar-Olivos

²Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Medica Sur Clinic and Foundation, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Rafael Barreto-Zúñiga

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Adriana Fabiola Romano-Munive

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Guido Grajales-Figueroa

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Luis Eduardo Zamora-Nava

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

,

Félix Ignacio Téllez-Avila

¹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Department of the National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico

› Institutsangaben

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).

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Pabby A, Schoen RE, Weissfeld JL. et al. Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary Polyp Prevention Trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 385-391
2 Coe SG, Crook JE, Diehl NN. et al. An endoscopic quality improvement program improves detection of colorectal adenomas. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 219-226
3 Sharma P, Gupta N, Kuipers EJ. et al. Advanced imaging in colonoscopy and its impact on quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 28-36
4 Buchner AM, Shahid MW, Heckman MG. et al. High-definition colonoscopy detects colorectal polyps at a higher rate than standard white-light colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 364-370
5 Davila RE. Chromoendoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2009; 19: 193-208
6 Mamula P, Tierney WM, Banerjee S. et al. Devices to improve colon polyp detection. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 1092-1097
7 de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, Bossuyt PM. et al. Adenoma detection with cap-assisted colonoscopy versus regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gut 2012; 61: 1426-1434
8 Ng SC, Tsoi KK, Hirai HW. et al. The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in polyp detection and cecal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1165-1173
9 Lenze F, Beyna T, Lenz P. et al. Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a new accessory to improve adenoma detection rate? Technical aspects and first clinical experiences. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 610-614
10 Biecker E, Floer M, Heinecke A. et al. Novel endocuff-assisted colonoscopy significantly increases the polyp detection rate: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Gastroenterol 2015; 49: 413-418
11 Floer M, Biecker E, Fitzlaff R. et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with endocuff-assisted colonoscopy – a randomized controlled multicenter trial. PLoS One 2014; 9: e114267
12 Calderwood AH, Jacobson BC. Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 686-692
13 Marcondes FO, Dean KM, Schoen RE. et al. The impact of exclusion criteria on a physician’s adenoma detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 668-675
14 Clark BT, Protiva P, Nagar A. et al. Quantification of adequate bowel preparation for screening or surveillance colonoscopy in men. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 396-405
15 de Lascurain-Morhan E. Prevalence of adenomas and carcinomas of the colon. Results of the rectosigmoid exam. Rev Gastroenterol Mex 2001; 66: 131-136
16 Garcia-Osogobio S, Tellez-Avila FI, Mendez-Sánchez N. et al. Results of the first program of colorectal cancer screening in Mexico. Endoscopia 2015; 27: 59-63
17 Hewett DG, Kahi CJ, Rex DK. Does colonoscopy work?. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 67-76
18 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
19 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 31-53
20 Tellez-Ávila FI, Murcio-Pérez E, Saul A. et al. Efficacy and tolerability of low-volume (2 L) versus single- (4 L) versus split-dose (2 L + 2 L) polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for colonoscopy: randomized clinical trial. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 731-736
21 Lebwohl B, Capiak K, Neugut AI. et al. Risk of colorectal adenomas and advanced neoplasia in Hispanic, black and white patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2012; 35: 1467-1473
22 Lee B, Holub J, Peters D. et al. Prevalence of colon polyps detected by colonoscopy screening of asymptomatic Hispanic patients. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 481-488
23 Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT. et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 24-28
24 Bressler B, Paszat LF, Vinden C. et al. Colonoscopic miss rates for right-sided colon cancer: a population based analysis. Gastroenterology 2004; 127: 452-456
25 Atkins L, Hunkeler EM, Jensen CD. et al. Factors influencing variation in physician adenoma detection rates: a theory-based approach for performance improvement. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 617-626
26 Matsuda T, Kawano H, Chiu HM. Screening colonoscopy: what is the most reliable modality for the detection and characterization of colorectal lesions?. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 25-29
27 van Doorn SC, van der Vlugt M, Depla A. et al. Adenoma detection with Endocuff colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Gut 2017; 66: 438-445
28 Chin M, Karnes W, Jamal MM. et al. Use of the Endocuff during routine colonoscopy examination improves adenoma detection: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 9642-9649
29 De Palma GD, Giglio MC, Bruzzese D. et al. Cap cuff-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized back-to-back study. Gastrointest Endosc 2017;