Literature DB >> 21894202

Colonoscopy: basic principles and novel techniques.

Yark Hazewinkel1, Evelien Dekker.   

Abstract

Colonoscopy is considered the 'gold standard' for detection and removal of premalignant lesions in the colon. However, studies suggest that colonoscopy is less protective for right-sided than for left-sided colorectal cancer. Optimizing the effectiveness of colonoscopy is a continuous process, and during the past decade several important quality indicators have been defined that can be used to measure the performance of colonoscopy and to identify areas for quality improvement. The quality of bowel preparation can be enhanced by split-dose regimens, which are superior to single-dose regimens. Cecal intubation rates should approximate 95% and can be optimized by good technique. In selected patients, specific devices can be used to facilitate cecal intubation. Adenoma detection rates should be monitored and exceed a minimum of 25% in men and 15% in women. To this aim, optimal withdrawal technique and adequate time for inspection are of utmost importance. Of all advanced imaging techniques, chromoendoscopy is the only technique with proven benefit for adenoma detection. Finally, the technique of polypectomy affects the number of complications as well as the success of completely removing a lesion. In this Review, we provide an overview of both standard and novel colonoscopy techniques and their impact on quality indicators.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21894202     DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2011.141

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1759-5045            Impact factor:   46.802


  108 in total

1.  Effect of magnetic endoscope imaging on colonoscopy performance: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  S G Shah; J C Brooker; C B Williams; C Thapar; B P Saunders
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-11-18       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Endoscopic indications for endoscopic mucosal resection of laterally spreading tumours in the colorectum.

Authors:  T Uraoka; Y Saito; T Matsuda; H Ikehara; T Gotoda; D Saito; T Fujii
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2006-05-08       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Cap-fitted colonoscopy: a randomized, tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates.

Authors:  David G Hewett; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Magnetic imaging of colonoscopy: an audit of looping, accuracy and ancillary maneuvers.

Authors:  S G Shah; B P Saunders; J C Brooker; C B Williams
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study.

Authors:  Florian Froehlich; Vincent Wietlisbach; Jean-Jacques Gonvers; Bernard Burnand; John-Paul Vader
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Comparison of standard vs high-definition, wide-angle colonoscopy for polyp detection: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  G Tribonias; A Theodoropoulou; K Konstantinidis; E Vardas; K Karmiris; N Chroniaris; G Chlouverakis; G A Paspatis
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.788

7.  Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Thomas F Imperiale; Danielle R Latinovich; L Lisa Bratcher
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Detachable snare versus epinephrine injection in the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding: a randomized and controlled study.

Authors:  P Di Giorgio; L De Luca; G Calcagno; G Rivellini; M Mandato; B De Luca
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 10.093

9.  Rates of complete colonic evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy and their associated factors: a population-based study.

Authors:  Randy Rizek; Lawrence F Paszat; Therese A Stukel; Refik Saskin; Cindy Li; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique.

Authors:  J E East; M Stavrindis; S Thomas-Gibson; T Guenther; P P Tekkis; B P Saunders
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2008-09-15       Impact factor: 8.171

View more
  18 in total

1.  Colorectal cancer: Strategies to minimize interval CRC in screening programmes.

Authors:  Evelien Dekker; Silvia Sanduleanu
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  Mucins and associated glycan signatures in colon adenoma-carcinoma sequence: Prospective pathological implication(s) for early diagnosis of colon cancer.

Authors:  Shiv Ram Krishn; Sukhwinder Kaur; Lynette M Smith; Sonny L Johansson; Maneesh Jain; Asish Patel; Shailendra K Gautam; Michael A Hollingsworth; Ulla Mandel; Henrik Clausen; Wing-Cheong Lo; Wai-Tong Louis Fan; Upender Manne; Surinder K Batra
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 8.679

3.  Effective communication enhances the patients' endoscopy experience.

Authors:  D P Toomey; M Hackett-Brennan; G Corrigan; C Singh; G Nessim; P Balfe
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 4.  Electrochemical biosensors for measurement of colorectal cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  Wenxian Zhang; Guangchun Xiao; Jun Chen; Li Wang; Qiongzheng Hu; Jian Wu; Wenhong Zhang; Ming Song; Jinwei Qiao; Chonghai Xu
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 4.142

5.  Yield of colonoscopy after recent CT-proven uncomplicated acute diverticulitis: a comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Lidewine Daniels; Çağdaş Ünlü; Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Hein B Stockmann; Ernst J Kuipers; Marja A Boermeester; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Role of new endoscopic techniques in Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Jasmijn F Haanstra; Jan H Kleibeuker; Jan J Koornstra
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.375

7.  Adenoma detection at colonoscopy by polypectomy in withdrawal only versus both insertion and withdrawal: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Madhusudhan R Sanaka; Mansour A Parsi; Carol A Burke; David Barnes; James Church; Maged Rizk; Nizar Zein; Rajesh Joseph; Prashanthi N Thota; Rocio Lopez; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-07-19       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  LONGER CECUM INSERTION TIME AND MORE INADEQUATE COLONIC PREPARATION IN PATIENTS WITH ACROMEGALY: IS A DIFFERENT COLONOSCOPY PREPARATION NEEDED?

Authors:  E Caglar; E Hatipoglu; D Atasoy; M Niyazoglu; A S Çağlar; M Tuncer; A Dobrucali; P Kadioglu
Journal:  Acta Endocrinol (Buchar)       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 0.877

9.  Highlights of international digestive endoscopy network 2013.

Authors:  Kwang An Kwon; Il Ju Choi; Eun Young Kim; Seok Ho Dong; Ki Baik Hahm
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2013-09-30

Review 10.  Developments in Screening Tests and Strategies for Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Justin L Sovich; Zachary Sartor; Subhasis Misra
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-04       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.