Literature DB >> 26846118

Impact of Colonoscopy Insertion Techniques on Adenoma Detection.

Sergio Cadoni1, Přemysl Falt2, Stefano Sanna3, Mariangela Argiolas3, Viviana Fanari3, Paolo Gallittu4, Mauro Liggi4, Donatella Mura4, Maria L Porcedda3, Vit Smajstrla2, Matteo Erriu5, Felix W Leung6,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Low adenoma detection rate (ADR) predicts development of interval cancers, found mainly in the right (cecum-ascending) colon, where poor bowel preparation is an associated factor. Single-site studies reported increased detection of adenomas in the proximal colon segments by water exchange (WE). Data about colon cleansing revealed that WE had the greatest impact in the right colon. AIMS: To test the hypothesis that WE had the greatest impact on ADR in colon segments with the most favorable bowel cleanliness scores, namely the right colon.
METHODS: We pooled right colon and overall ADR data of three similarly designed colonoscopy trials that compared WE, water immersion (WI) and insufflation of air or carbon dioxide (AICD) in a mixed gender European population.
RESULTS: In this study, 1200 (704 males) subjects and were included. 288 were screening cases. Demographic and procedural data were comparable. Water exchange achieved significantly higher right colon <10 mm ADR (11.9 %, vs WI 6.9 %, p = 0.016; vs AICD 7.2 %, p = 0.025). Water exchange achieved the lowest proportions of poor bowel preparation and the highest right colon and overall Boston bowel preparation scale scores (p range 0.003, <0.0005). In patients with right colon excellent bowel cleanliness, water exchange was the only method significantly associated with right colon adenoma detection. One of the limitations is unblinded colonoscopists.
CONCLUSIONS: In a mixed gender European population, water exchange is confirmed to be a superior insertion technique showing a significant increase in <10 mm right colon adenoma detection, achieving the cleanest colon and lowest proportions of poor bowel preparation requiring repeat procedures. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV NO: NCT01781650, 01954862, 01780818.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bowel cleanliness; Colon lesion detection; Interval cancer; Small adenomas; Water-aided colonoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26846118     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-016-4053-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  42 in total

Review 1.  Split dosing of bowel preparations for colonoscopy: an analysis of its efficacy, safety, and tolerability.

Authors:  Lawrence B Cohen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  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:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 3.  The cutting edge of serrated polyps: a practical guide to approaching and managing serrated colon polyps.

Authors:  Berkeley N Limketkai; Dora Lam-Himlin; Michael A Arnold; Christina A Arnold
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Prevalence and predictors of interval colorectal cancers in medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Gregory S Cooper; Fang Xu; Jill S Barnholtz Sloan; Mark D Schluchter; Siran M Koroukian
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Brian Bressler; Lawrence F Paszat; Zhongliang Chen; Deanna M Rothwell; Chris Vinden; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 22.682

6.  Colorectal cancers soon after colonoscopy: a pooled multicohort analysis.

Authors:  Douglas J Robertson; David A Lieberman; Sidney J Winawer; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron; Arthur Schatzkin; Amanda J Cross; Ann G Zauber; Timothy R Church; Peter Lance; E Robert Greenberg; María Elena Martínez
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Interval colorectal cancer after colonoscopy.

Authors:  James M Richter; Emily J Campbell; Daniel C Chung
Journal:  Clin Colorectal Cancer       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 4.481

8.  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

9.  Split-dose preparation for colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate: a randomised controlled trial in an organised screening programme.

Authors:  F Radaelli; S Paggi; C Hassan; C Senore; R Fasoli; A Anderloni; F Buffoli; M F Savarese; G Spinzi; D K Rex; A Repici
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  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

View more
  8 in total

1.  Water Exchange Method Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Hui Jia; Yanglin Pan; Xuegang Guo; Lina Zhao; Xiangping Wang; Linhui Zhang; Tao Dong; Hui Luo; Zhizheng Ge; Jun Liu; Jianyu Hao; Ping Yao; Yao Zhang; Hongyu Ren; Weizhen Zhou; Yujie Guo; Wei Zhang; Xiaolin Chen; Dayong Sun; Xiaoqiang Yang; Xiaoyu Kang; Na Liu; Zhiguo Liu; Felix Leung; Kaichun Wu; Daiming Fan
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Association of Adenoma and Proximal Sessile Serrated Polyp Detection Rates With Endoscopist Characteristics.

Authors:  Shashank Sarvepalli; Ari Garber; Michael B Rothberg; Gautam Mankaney; John McMichael; Gareth Morris-Stiff; John J Vargo; Maged K Rizk; Carol A Burke
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

Review 3.  Water-Assisted Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sergio Cadoni; Felix W Leung
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03

4.  Comparison of Water Immersion Versus Air Insufflation Colonoscopy Under Various Bowel Preparation Conditions.

Authors:  Sijia Niu; Youlin Yang; Guoyin Shang; Yingying Chen; Zhibin Ma; Feng Wu; Huichao Zhang
Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.852

5.  Use of warm carbon dioxide insufflators does not affect intra-colonic gas temperature and has no effect on polyp detection rate during colonoscopy - a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Akash M Patel; Jordan Green; Fahd Jowhari; Lawrence Hookey
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2017-07-06

Review 6.  Is water exchange superior to water immersion for colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhihao Chen; Zhengqi Li; Xinying Yu; Guiqi Wang
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.485

7.  How to increase proximal adenoma detection rate: a meta-analysis comparing water exchange, water immersion and air/CO2 insufflation methods for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Muhammad Aziz; Sachit Sharma; Rawish Fatima; Wade Lee-Smith; Thomas Sodeman; Ali Nawras; Douglas G Adler
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-02-14

Review 8.  Can technology increase adenoma detection rate?

Authors:  Wee Sing Ngu; Colin Rees
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.409

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.