Literature DB >> 20179689

High-definition chromocolonoscopy vs. high-definition white light colonoscopy for average-risk colorectal cancer screening.

Charles J Kahi1, Joseph C Anderson, Irving Waxman, William R Kessler, Thomas F Imperiale, Xiaochun Li, Douglas K Rex.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Flat and depressed colon neoplasms are an increasingly recognized precursor for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Western populations. High-definition chromoscopy is used to increase the yield of colonoscopy for flat and depressed neoplasms; however, its role in average-risk patients undergoing routine screening remains uncertain.
METHODS: Average-risk patients referred for screening colonoscopy at four U.S. medical centers were randomized to high-definition chromocolonoscopy or high-definition white light colonoscopy. The primary outcomes, patients with at least one adenoma and the number of adenomas per patient, were compared between the two groups. The secondary outcome was patients with flat or depressed neoplasms, as defined by the Paris classification.
RESULTS: A total of 660 patients were randomized (chromocolonoscopy: 321, white light: 339). Overall, the mean number of adenomas per patient was 1.2+/-2.1, the mean number of flat polyps per patient was 1.4+/-1.9, and the mean number of flat adenomas per patient was 0.5+/-1.0. The number of patients with at least one adenoma (55.5% vs. 48.4%, absolute difference 7.1%, 95% confidence interval (-0.5% to 14.7%), P=0.07), and the number of adenomas per patient (1.3+/-2.4 vs. 1.1+/-1.8, P=0.07) were marginally higher in the chromocolonoscopy group. There were no significant differences in the number of advanced adenomas per patient (0.06+/-0.37 vs. 0.04+/-0.25, P=0.3) and the number of advanced adenomas<10 mm per patient (0.02+/-0.26 vs. 0.01+/-0.14, P=0.4). Two invasive cancers were found, one in each group; neither was a flat neoplasm. Chromocolonoscopy detected significantly more flat adenomas per patient (0.6+/-1.2 vs. 0.4+/-0.9, P=0.01), adenomas<5 mm in diameter per patient (0.8+/-1.3 vs. 0.7+/-1.1, P=0.03), and non-neoplastic lesions per patient (1.8+/-2.3 vs. 1.0+/-1.3, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: High-definition chromocolonoscopy marginally increased overall adenoma detection, and yielded a modest increase in flat adenoma and small adenoma detection, compared with high-definition white light colonoscopy. The yield for advanced neoplasms was similar for the two methods. Our findings do not support the routine use of high-definition chromocolonoscopy for CRC screening in average-risk patients. The high adenoma detection rates observed in this study may be due to the high-definition technology used in both groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20179689     DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2010.51

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  61 in total

1.  The water method for aiding colonoscope insertion: the learning curve of an experienced colonoscopist.

Authors:  Francisco C Ramirez; Felix W Leung
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-01

2.  A head-to-head comparison of the water vs. air method in patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Francisco C Ramirez; Felix W Leung
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-01

3.  Variants downstream of the ornithine decarboxylase gene influence risk of colorectal adenoma and aspirin chemoprevention.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Barry; Leila A Mott; Robert S Sandler; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2011-09-19

4.  Chromocolonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: Dive into the Big Blue.

Authors:  Charles J Kahi
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-01

5.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Philip S Schoenfeld; Jonathan Cohen; Irving M Pike; Douglas G Adler; M Brian Fennerty; John G Lieb; Walter G Park; Maged K Rizk; Mandeep S Sawhney; Nicholas J Shaheen; Sachin Wani; David S Weinberg
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Indigocarmine added to the water exchange method enhances adenoma detection - a RCT.

Authors:  Joseph Leung; Surinder Mann; Rodelei Siao-Salera; Catherine Ngo; Randy McCreery; Wilhemina Canete; Felix Leung
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-01

Review 7.  Advances in endoscopy for colorectal polyp detection and classification.

Authors:  Vijeta Pamudurthy; Nayna Lodhia; Vani J A Konda
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-12-18

8.  Quality indicators for colorectal cancer screening for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Philip S Schoenfeld; Jonathan Cohen
Journal:  Tech Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-04

9.  One-year risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia: U.S. versus U.K. risk-stratification guidelines.

Authors:  María Elena Martínez; Patricia Thompson; Karen Messer; Erin L Ashbeck; David A Lieberman; John A Baron; Dennis J Ahnen; Douglas J Robertson; Elizabeth T Jacobs; E Robert Greenberg; Amanda J Cross; Wendy Atkin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  High-definition colonoscopy with i-Scan: better diagnosis for small polyps and flat adenomas.

Authors:  Pier Alberto Testoni; Chiara Notaristefano; Cristian Vailati; Milena Di Leo; Edi Viale
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-07       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.