BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Distal attachments placed on the colonoscope tip may positively affect performance by assisting insertion and polyp detection. The original Endocuff (ARC Medical Design, Leeds, United Kingdom) appears to improve adenoma detection rate (ADR), but no data assess the performance of the second-generation Endocuff Vision. METHODS: A pilot service evaluation study (April 2013 to September 2014) was conducted on patients with positive fecal occult blood tests within the National Bowel Cancer Programme during 3 consecutive periods: precuff/no device used, during-cuff/device used, and postcuff/no device used. During the middle period the use of the Endocuff Vision by the 4 screening-accredited colonoscopists was discretional (nonrandomized design). Data were analyzed using pairwise comparisons during the 3 designated periods to examine key performance indicators: adenoma detection, procedural time, sedation requirements, and patient comfort. RESULTS: Four hundred ten complete colonoscopies were performed (137 precuff, 136 cuff, and 137 postcuff period). Overall, there was a notable increase in the mean ADR of 16% (P < .03) and in the mean number adenoma per procedure (MAP) of 83% (P = .007) from precuff to cuff period. The mean cecal intubation time was statistically lower during the cuff period (7 minutes) in relation to the precuff period (8 minutes; reduction of 12.5%, P = .002) and the postcuff period (9 minutes; increase of 28.6%, P = .002). The mean negative colonoscopy withdrawal time was also significantly lower during the cuff period (8 minutes, 30 seconds) when compared with the precuff (12 minutes) or postcuff period (9 minutes, 45 seconds; P ≤ .001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the use of the Endocuff Vision was not associated with sedation requirements or patient discomfort scores. No adverse events were reported from the use of the Endocuff Vision, although it was electively removed in 6 patients where severe sigmoid colon diverticulosis was encountered and 2 patients because of discomfort during anal insertion. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot service evaluation study, the use of the Endocuff Vision appears to be associated with an improvement in overall colonoscopy operator performance. We found increased ADR and MAP as well as decreased time for colonoscope insertion and withdrawal time with no increase in sedation requirements or patient discomfort. Crown
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Distal attachments placed on the colonoscope tip may positively affect performance by assisting insertion and polyp detection. The original Endocuff (ARC Medical Design, Leeds, United Kingdom) appears to improve adenoma detection rate (ADR), but no data assess the performance of the second-generation Endocuff Vision. METHODS: A pilot service evaluation study (April 2013 to September 2014) was conducted on patients with positive fecal occult blood tests within the National Bowel Cancer Programme during 3 consecutive periods: precuff/no device used, during-cuff/device used, and postcuff/no device used. During the middle period the use of the Endocuff Vision by the 4 screening-accredited colonoscopists was discretional (nonrandomized design). Data were analyzed using pairwise comparisons during the 3 designated periods to examine key performance indicators: adenoma detection, procedural time, sedation requirements, and patient comfort. RESULTS: Four hundred ten complete colonoscopies were performed (137 precuff, 136 cuff, and 137 postcuff period). Overall, there was a notable increase in the mean ADR of 16% (P < .03) and in the mean number adenoma per procedure (MAP) of 83% (P = .007) from precuff to cuff period. The mean cecal intubation time was statistically lower during the cuff period (7 minutes) in relation to the precuff period (8 minutes; reduction of 12.5%, P = .002) and the postcuff period (9 minutes; increase of 28.6%, P = .002). The mean negative colonoscopy withdrawal time was also significantly lower during the cuff period (8 minutes, 30 seconds) when compared with the precuff (12 minutes) or postcuff period (9 minutes, 45 seconds; P ≤ .001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the use of the Endocuff Vision was not associated with sedation requirements or patient discomfort scores. No adverse events were reported from the use of the Endocuff Vision, although it was electively removed in 6 patients where severe sigmoid colon diverticulosis was encountered and 2 patients because of discomfort during anal insertion. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot service evaluation study, the use of the Endocuff Vision appears to be associated with an improvement in overall colonoscopy operator performance. We found increased ADR and MAP as well as decreased time for colonoscope insertion and withdrawal time with no increase in sedation requirements or patient discomfort. Crown
Authors: Wee Sing Ngu; Roisin Bevan; Zacharias P Tsiamoulos; Paul Bassett; Zoë Hoare; Matthew D Rutter; Gayle Clifford; Nicola Totton; Thomas J Lee; Arvind Ramadas; John G Silcock; John Painter; Laura J Neilson; Brian P Saunders; Colin J Rees Journal: Gut Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Nauzer Forbes; Robert J Hilsden; Yibing Ruan; Abbey E Poirier; Dylan E O'Sullivan; Kyla M Craig; Diana Kerrison; Darren R Brenner; Steven J Heitman Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2021-10-25
Authors: John C Thygesen; Prasanna Ponugoti; William W Tippins; Jonathan R Garcia; Andrew W Sullivan; Heather M Broadley; Douglas K Rex Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2018-08-01