Trilokesh D Kidambi1, Jonathan P Terdiman2, Najwa El-Nachef2, Aparajita Singh2, Michael G Kattah3, Jeffrey K Lee4. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 3. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California. 4. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California; Department of Gastroenterology, Kaiser Permanente San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: jeffrey.k.lee@kp.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: I-scan is an electronic chromoendoscopy technology that improves resolution of epithelial and mucosal surfaces and vessels. We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare detection of adenomas by i-scan vs standard high-definition white-light (HDWL) colonoscopy. METHODS:From February 1 through December 31, 2017, 740 outpatients (50-75 years old) undergoing screening and surveillance for colorectal neoplasia were randomly assigned to groups that received colonoscopies with i-scan 1 (surface and contrast enhancement) or HDWL. When lesions and polyps were detected, endoscopists could switch between i-scan 1 and HDWL imaging to confirm their finding; polyps were collected and analyzed by histology. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR, proportion of subjects with at least 1 adenoma of any size); secondary outcomes included detection of sessile serrated polyps and neoplasias, along with location, size, and morphology of polyps. We performed intent to treat and per-protocol analyses (on 357 patients evaluated by i-scan and 358 evaluated by HDWL colonoscopy) to assess the primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. In the intent to treat analysis, the ADR was significantly higher in the i-scan 1 group (47.2%) than in the HDWL colonoscopy group (37.7%) (P = .01). In the per-protocol analysis, the ADR in the i-scan 1 group (47.6%) was also significantly higher than in the HDWL group (37.2%) (P = .005), but this effect was not consistent among all endoscopists. There was no difference between groups in detection of sessile serrated polyps. However, the rate of neoplasia detection was significantly higher in the i-scan 1 group (56.4%) than in the than the HDWL group (46.1%) (P = .005). In secondary analyses, the increase in ADR was associated with improved detection of diminutive flat adenomas in the right colon. CONCLUSION: In a prospective randomized trial, higher proportions of patients with adenomas were identified in a group that underwent colonoscopy with i-scan 1 than in a group evaluated by HDWL colonoscopy. This effect was mainly due to improved detection of diminutive, flat right sided adenomas. I-scan 1 technology may benefit some endoscopists. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02811419.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: I-scan is an electronic chromoendoscopy technology that improves resolution of epithelial and mucosal surfaces and vessels. We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare detection of adenomas by i-scan vs standard high-definition white-light (HDWL) colonoscopy. METHODS: From February 1 through December 31, 2017, 740 outpatients (50-75 years old) undergoing screening and surveillance for colorectal neoplasia were randomly assigned to groups that received colonoscopies with i-scan 1 (surface and contrast enhancement) or HDWL. When lesions and polyps were detected, endoscopists could switch between i-scan 1 and HDWL imaging to confirm their finding; polyps were collected and analyzed by histology. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR, proportion of subjects with at least 1 adenoma of any size); secondary outcomes included detection of sessile serrated polyps and neoplasias, along with location, size, and morphology of polyps. We performed intent to treat and per-protocol analyses (on 357 patients evaluated by i-scan and 358 evaluated by HDWL colonoscopy) to assess the primary and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. In the intent to treat analysis, the ADR was significantly higher in the i-scan 1 group (47.2%) than in the HDWL colonoscopy group (37.7%) (P = .01). In the per-protocol analysis, the ADR in the i-scan 1 group (47.6%) was also significantly higher than in the HDWL group (37.2%) (P = .005), but this effect was not consistent among all endoscopists. There was no difference between groups in detection of sessile serrated polyps. However, the rate of neoplasia detection was significantly higher in the i-scan 1 group (56.4%) than in the than the HDWL group (46.1%) (P = .005). In secondary analyses, the increase in ADR was associated with improved detection of diminutive flat adenomas in the right colon. CONCLUSION: In a prospective randomized trial, higher proportions of patients with adenomas were identified in a group that underwent colonoscopy with i-scan 1 than in a group evaluated by HDWL colonoscopy. This effect was mainly due to improved detection of diminutive, flat right sided adenomas. I-scan 1 technology may benefit some endoscopists. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02811419.
Authors: Muhammad Aziz; Zohaib Ahmed; Hossein Haghbin; Asad Pervez; Hemant Goyal; Faisal Kamal; Abdallah Kobeissy; Ali Nawras; Douglas G Adler Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2022-06-10
Authors: Martin Buerger; Philipp Kasper; Gabriel Allo; Johannes Gillessen; Christoph Schramm Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 3.067