The Miss Rate for Colorectal Adenoma Determined by Quality-Adjusted, Back-to-Back Colonoscopies

Background/Aims

Colonoscopy is considered to be the gold standard for detecting adenomatous polyps. Polyps are missed during colonoscopic examination at a rate that varies from 6% to 27%. The adenoma miss rate affects colonoscopic surveillance intervals and procedural quality. We aimed to assess the adenoma miss rate and the variables affecting the rate using same-day, quality-adjusted, back-to-back colonoscopies.

Methods

This prospective study was performed at a single institution and included 149 patients. Two consecutive same-day colonoscopies were performed by two experienced endoscopists. The adenoma miss rates and variables affecting the missed adenomas, including polyp characteristics and procedure times, were evaluated.

Results

The miss rates of polyps, adenomas, and advanced adenomas were 16.8%, 17%, and 5.4%, respectively. The smaller polyps and increased number of polyps detected during the first colonoscopy were more likely to be missed. A longer insertion time during the colonoscopy was correlated with an increased adenoma detection rate.

Conclusions

There was a significant miss rate in the detection of colonic adenomas even in quality-adjusted, back-to-back colonoscopies. The adenoma miss rate can be reduced with a sufficient observation time during colonoscopic insertion. The development of specific technological methods to reduce the adenoma miss rate is necessary.     

Bowel cleansing before colonoscopy:Balancing efficacy,safety,cost and patient tolerance

Effective colorectal cancer screening relies on reliable colonoscopy findings which are themselves dependent on adequate bowel cleansing. Research has consistently demonstrated that inadequate bowel preparation adversely affects the adenoma detection rate and leads gastroenterologists to recommend earlier follow up than is consistent with published guidelines. Poor preparation affects as many as 30% of colonoscopies and contributes to an increased cost of colonoscopies. Patient tolerability is strongly affected by the preparation chosen and manner in which it is administered. Poor tolerability is,in turn,associated with lower quality bowel preparations. Recently,several new developments in both agents being used for bowel preparation and in the timing of administration have brought endoscopists closer to achieving the goal of effective,reliable,safe,and tolerable regimens. Historically,large volume preparations given in a single dose were administered to patients in order to achieve adequate bowel cleansing. These were poorly tolerated,and the unpleasant taste of and significant side effects produced by these large volume regimens contributed significantly to patients' inability to reliably complete the preparation and to a reluctance to repeat the procedure. Smaller volumes,including preparations that are administered as tablets to be consumed with water,given as split doses have significantly improved both the patient experience and efficacy,and an appreciation of the importance of the preparation to colonoscopy interval have produced additional cleansing.     

Retrograde inspection vs standard forward view for the detection of colorectal adenomas during colonoscopy: A back-to-back randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND The adenoma detection rate(ADR) is inversely associated with the incidence of interval colorectal cancer and serves as a benchmark quality criterion during screening colonoscopy. However, adenoma miss rates reach up to 26% and studies have shown that a second inspection of the right colon in retroflected view(RFV) can increase ADR.AIM To assess whether inspection of the whole colon in RFV compared to standard forward view(SFV) can increase ADR.METHODS Patients presenting for screening or surveillance colonoscopy were invited to participate in this randomized controlled trial and randomized into two arms. In RFV arm colonoscopy was initially performed with SFV, followed by a second inspection of the whole colon in RFV. In the SFV arm first withdrawal was performed with SFV, followed by a second inspection of the whole colon again with SFV. Number, size and morphology of polyps found during first and second inspection in each colonic segment were recorded and all polyps were removed and sent for histopathology in separate containers.RESULTS Two hundred and five patients were randomly assigned to the RFV(n = 101) and SFV(n = 104) arm. In the RFV arm, both polyp detection rate(PDR) and ADR were increased under second inspection in RFV(PDR 1~(st) SFV: 39.8%, PDR 2~(nd)RFV: 46.6%; ADR 1~(st) SFV: 35.2%, ADR 2~(nd) RFV: 42%). Likewise, in the SFV arm,PDR and ADR were increased under second inspection(PDR 1~(st) SFV: 37.5%, PDR 2~(nd) SFV: 46.6%; ADR 1~(st) SFV: 34.1%, ADR 2~(nd)SFV: 44.3%) with no significant differences in ADR and PDR between the SFV and RFV arm. Mean number of adenomas per patient(APP) was increased in the RFV and SFV(APP RFV arm: 1~(st) SFV: 1.71; 2~(nd) RFV: 2.38; APP SFV arm: 1~(st) SFV: 1.83, 2~(nd)SFV:2.2). The majority of adenomas additionally found during second inspection in RFV or in SFV were located in the transverse and left-sided colon and were 5 mm in size.CONCLUSION Second inspection of the whole colon leads to increased adenoma detection with no differences between SFV and RFV. Hence, increased detection is most likely a feature of the second inspection itself but not of the inspection mode.     

Risk factors associated with missed colorectal flat adenoma: A multicenter retrospective tandem colonoscopy study

AIM: To determine the miss rate for colorectal flat adenomas during colonoscopy and the risk factors. METHODS: Flat adenomas are frequently missed during colonoscopy. However, the risk factors that influence their miss rates are unclear. This was a multicenter, retrospective study in which patients diagnosed with colorectal adenomas at a diagnostic colonoscopy and followed within 3 mo by a second therapeutic colonoscopy were pooled out from the established database. The “per-patient” and “per-adenoma” adenoma miss rates (AMR) for overall adenomas and flat adenomas, and patient-, adenoma-, and procedure-related risk factors potentially associated with the “per-adenoma” AMR for flat adenomas were determined. RESULTS: Chromoscopy and high-definition colonoscopy were not taken under consideration in the study. Among 2093 patients with colorectal adenomas, 691 (33.0%) were diagnosed with flat adenomas, 514 with concomitant protruding adenomas and 177 without. The “per-patient” AMR for flat adenomas was 43.3% (299/691); the rates were 54.3% and 11.3%, respectively, for those with protruding adenomas and those without (OR = 9.320, 95%CI: 5.672-15.314, χ² = 99.084, P < 0.001). The “per-adenoma” AMR for flat adenomas was 44.3% (406/916). In multivariate analysis, older age, presence of concomitant protruding adenomas, poor bowel preparation, smaller adenoma size, location at the right colon, insufficient experience of the colonoscopist, and withdrawal time < 6 min were associated with an increased “per-adenoma” AMR for flat adenomas. The AMR for flat adenomas was moderately correlated with that for overall adenomas (r = 0.516, P < 0.0001). The AMR for flat adenomas during colonoscopy was high. CONCLUSION: Patient’s age, concomitant protruding adenomas, bowel preparation, size and location of adenomas, proficiency of the colonoscopist, and withdrawal time are factors affecting the “per-adenoma” AMR for flat adenomas.     

Bowel preparations as quality indicators for colonoscopy

Colonoscopy is the principal investigative procedure for colorectal neoplasms because it can detect and remove most precancerous lesions.The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on the quality of the examination.Bowel preparation is an essential part of high-quality colonoscopies because only an optimal colonic cleansing allows the colonoscopist to clearly view the entire colonic mucosa and to identify any polyps or other lesions.Suboptimal bowel preparation not only prolongs the overall procedure time,decreases the cecal intubation rate,and increases the costs associated with colonoscopy but also increases the risk of missing polyps or adenomas during the colonoscopy.Therefore,a repeat examination or a shorter colonoscopy follow-up interval may be suitable strategies for a patient with suboptimal bowel preparation.     

A randomized controlled trial of four precolonoscopy bowel cleansing regimens

BACKGROUND:

The ideal bowel cleansing regimen for colonoscopy has yet to be determined.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the cleansing efficacy, and patient tolerability and safety of four bowel preparation regimens.

METHODS:

A total of 834 patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were randomly assigned to one of four regimens: 4 L polyethylene glycol (PEG); 2 L PEG + 20 mg bisacodyl; 90 mL of sodium phosphate (NaP); or two sachets of a commercially available bowel cleansing solution (PSMC) + 300 mL of magnesium citrate (M). The primary outcome measure was cleansing efficacy, which was scored by blinded endoscopists using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcome measures were bowel preparation quality according to time of colonoscopy, and patient tolerability and safety.

RESULTS:

The mean total cleansing score was significantly worse in the NaP group compared with the other three groups (P<0.0001). The mean cleansing scores were worse in patients who underwent morning versus afternoon colonoscopy, a finding that was consistent in all four groups. PSMC + M was the best tolerated regimen. No clinically significant mean changes in creatinine or electrolyte levels were identified, although a significantly higher proportion of patients in the NaP group developed hypokelemia (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

2 L PEG + 20 mg bisacodyl, or PSMC + M was as efficacious as 4 L PEG and superior to NaP for bowel cleansing. A short interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy (ie, ‘runway time’), irrespective of bowel preparation regimen, appeared to be a more important predictor of bowel cleanliness than the cathartic agents used.     

Comparison of asymmetric (low morning-dose) and standard split-dose regimen of PEG plus bisacodyl for bowel preparation: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundReducing the morning dose of PEG solution may be a reliable strategy to improve the patient compliance of split-dose regimens without affecting efficacy of bowel cleansing.Aimsto compare the efficacy for bowel cleansing of an asymmetric split-dose regimen (25% of the dose on the day of colonoscopy and 75% on the day before) with the standard split-dose regimen.MethodsOutpatients were enrolled in a randomized, single-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. All subjects received a split-dose preparation with a 2L PEG-citrate-simethicone plus Bisacodyl. Patients were randomly assigned to: group A, asymmetric split-dose regimen; group B, symmetric split-dose regimen. Primary endpoint was the proportion of adequate bowel cleansing.ResultsSplit-dose was taken by 81 and 80 patients in group A and B. Adequate bowel cleansing was achieved in 92.6% and 92.5% patients in group A and B (p = 1.000). No differences were observed regarding Boston Bowel Preparation Scale total score, adenoma detection rate and scores of each colon segment.ConclusionsThe reduction of morning dose of PEG in a split-dose regimen is not inferior to the standard split-dose regimen in achieving an adequate bowel cleansing. However, further studies are needed to evaluate whether asymmetric preparation is associated to a higher tolerability compared to symmetric split-dose regimen. (NCT03146052)     

黑色先端帽联合窄带光成像在结肠镜检查中的作用

目的评估黑色先端帽辅助结肠镜联合窄带光成像（narrow band imaging,NBI）技术对腺瘤/息肉检出效能的影响。方法连续纳入2016年10月—2018年10月行结肠镜检查的患者,采用随机数字表法分为黑色先端帽组和对照组,黑色端帽组采用黑色先端帽辅助结肠镜联合NBI技术,对照组采用标准白光结肠镜,比较两组的息肉检出率、腺瘤检出率等指标,并进行亚组分析。结果共1 000例患者纳入本研究（每组500例）,黑色先端帽组和对照组近端结肠腺瘤检出率分别为24.2%(121/500)和17.2%(86/500),近端结肠息肉检出率分别为28.8%(144/500)和21.4%(107/500),平均腺瘤检出数分别0.41±0.94和0.26±0.68,平均息肉检出数为0.63±1.16和0.40±0.85,差异均有统计学意义（P均<0.05）,但该联合技术对于远端结直肠病变的检出率相较对照组无明显优势。结论黑色先端帽辅助结肠镜联合NBI能显著提高近端结肠腺瘤和息肉等微小病变的检出效能。     

Timing and frequency of bowel activity in patients ingesting sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate and adjuvant bisacodyl for colon cleansing before colonoscopy

BACKGROUND:

Despite the wealth of research investigating bowel cleansing efficacy, there are very little data on the timing or frequency of bowel movements after each agent is ingested.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the effect of each component of a three-day combined sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate (PSLX) and bisacodyl regimen on the timing and frequency of bowel activity in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS:

Outpatients booked for colonoscopy were asked to complete a diary of their bowel preparation that tracked the timing of bowel movements. Bowel preparation quality was assessed using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale. Bowel activity was compared with baseline and correlated with colon cleansing. Subgroup analysis was performed examining the effect of timing of the procedure and split-dose regimens.

RESULTS:

One hundred patients undergoing colon cleansing received bisacodyl 10 mg at 17:00 three days and two days before the day of colonoscopy. In one group, both sachets of PSLX were given the night before colonoscopy, while the second group, whose colonoscopies were scheduled after 11:00, ingested one sachet the night before and the second sachet at 06:00 on the day of colonoscopy. Patients had a mean of 1.7 bowel movements per day in the seven days before starting the cleansing regimen. Both doses of bisacodyl tablets resulted in a significant increase in the mean number of bowel movements compared with baseline (3.3/day first dose; 3.8/day second dose [P=0.03 and 0.001, respectively]). Each dose of PSLX also resulted in a significant increase in bowel movement frequency compared with baseline, with means of 4.4, 6.3 and 4.5 bowel movements after each dose. The mean time to the final bowel movement following the second sachet of PSLX was 8.9 h when taken the night before, and 3.9 h when taken the morning of the procedure. Bowel preparation quality significantly correlated with bowel frequency when total bowel movements were considered and when only the effects of bisacodyl were accounted for (P<0.01 for each).

DISCUSSION:

These data demonstrate that the addition of bisacodyl before PSLX ingestion has a significant additive effect on bowel frequency and correlates with bowel cleansing quality. The timing of the resulting bowel movements have practical implications for sleep and travel times to endoscopy suites.     

Is artificial intelligence the final answer to missed polyps in colonoscopy?

Lesions missed by colonoscopy are one of the main reasons for post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer, which is usually associated with a worse prognosis. Because the adenoma miss rate could be as high as 26%, it has been noted that endoscopists with higher adenoma detection rates are usually associated with lower adenoma miss rates. Artificial intelligence(AI), particularly the deep learning model, is a promising innovation in colonoscopy. Recent studies have shown that AI is not only accurate in colorectal polyp detection but can also reduce the miss rate. Nevertheless, the application of AI in real-time detection has been hindered by heterogeneity of the AI models and study design as well as a lack of long-term outcomes. Herein, we discussed the principle of various AI models and systematically reviewed the current data on the use of AI on colorectal polyp detection and miss rates. The limitations and future prospects of AI on colorectal polyp detection are also discussed.     

Same-day 2-L PEG-citrate-simethicone plus bisacodyl vs split 4-L PEG: Bowel cleansing for late-morning colonoscopy

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, acceptability and feasibility of bisacodyl plus low volume polyethyleneglycol-citrate-simeticone(2-L PEG-CS) taken the same day as compared with conventional split-dose 4-L PEG for late morning colonoscopy. METHODS: Randomised, observer-blind, parallel group, comparative trial carried out in 2 centres. Out patients of both sexes, aged between 18 and 85 years, undergoing colonoscopy for diagnostic investigation, colorectal cancer screening or follow-up were eligible. The PEG-CS group received 3 bisacodyl tablets(4 tablets for patients with constipation) at bedtime and 2-L PEG-CS in the morning starting 5 h before colonoscopy. The control group received a conventional 4-L PEG formulation given as split regimen; the morning dose was taken with the same schedule of the low volume preparation. The Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale(OBPS) score was used as the main outcome measure.RESULTS: A total of 164 subjects were enrolled and 154 completed the study; 78 in the PEG-CS group and 76 in the split 4-L PEG group. The two groups were comparable at baseline. The OBPS score in the PEG-CS group(3.09 ± 2.40) and in the PEG group(2.39 ± 2.55) were equivalent(difference +0.70; 95%CI:-0.09-1.48). This was confirmed by the rate of successful bowel cleansing in the PEG-CS group(89.7%) and in the PEG group(92.1%)(difference-2.4%; 95%CI:-11.406.70). PEG-CS was superior in terms of mucosa visibility compared to PEG(85.7% vs 72.4%, P = 0.042). There were no significant differences in caecum intubation rate, time to reach the caecum and withdrawal time between the two groups. The adenoma detection rate was similar(PEG-CS 43.6% vs PEG 44.7%). No serious adverse events occurred. No difference was found in tolerability of the bowel preparations. Compliance was equal in both groups: more than 90% of subjects drunk the whole solution. Willingness to repeat the same bowel preparations was about 90% for both regimes. CONCLUSION: Same-day PEG-CS is feasible, effective as split-dose 4-L PEG for late morning colonoscopy and does not interfere with work and daily activities the day before colonoscopy.     

Quality monitoring in colonoscopy: Time to act

Colonoscopy is the gold standard test for colorectal cancer screening. The primary advantage of colonoscopy as opposed to other screening modalities is the ability to provide therapy by removal of precancerous lesions at the time of detection. However, colonoscopy may miss clinically important neoplastic polyps. The value of colonoscopy in reducing incidence of colorectal cancer is dependent on many factors including, the patient, provider, and facility level. A high quality examination includes adequate bowel preparation, optimal colonoscopy technique, meticulous inspection during withdrawal, identification of subtle flat lesions, and complete polypectomy. Considerable variation among institutions and endoscopists has been reported in the literature. In attempt to diminish this disparity, various approaches have been advocated to improve the quality of colonoscopy. The overall impact of these interventions is not yet well defined. Implementing optimal education and training and subsequently analyzing the impact of these endeavors in improvement of quality will be essential to augment the utility of colonoscopy for the prevention of colorectal cancer.     

PillCamColon2 after incomplete colonoscopy-A prospective multicenter study

AIM To evaluate the ability of PillCamColon2 to visualize colonic segments missed by incomplete optical colonoscopy(OC) and to assess the diagnostic yield.METHODS This prospective multicentre study included 81 patients from nine centres who underwent second-generation colon capsule endoscopy(CCE) following incomplete OC performed by an experienced gastroenterologist( 1000 colonoscopies). Patients with stenosis were excluded. According to patient preferences, CCE was performed the following day(protocol A) after staying on clear liquids and 0.75 L Moviprep in the morning or within 30 d after new split-dose Moviprep(protocol B). Boosts consisted of 0.75 L and 0.25 L Moviprep, and phospho-soda was given as a rescue if the capsule was not excreted after seven hours.RESULTS Seventy-four patients were analysed(51% of them in group A; 49% in group B). Bowel cleansing was adequate in 67% of cases, and CCE could visualize colonic segments missed by incomplete colonoscopy in 90% of patients under protocol A and 97% of patients under protocol B(P = 0.35, n.s.). Significant polyps including adenocarcinoma were detected in 24% of cases. Detection rates for all polyps and significant polyps per patient were similar in both protocols. Polyps were found predominantly in the right colon(86%) in segments that were not reached by OC. Extracolonic findings-such as reflux esophagitis, suspected Barrett esophagus, upper GI-bleeding, gastric polyps, gastric erosions and angiectasia-were detected in eight patients. Pill Cam Colon2 capsule was retained in the ileum of one patient(1.4%) without symptoms and removed during an uneventful resection for unknown Crohn's disease that was diagnosed as the cause of anemia, which was the indication for colonoscopy. CCE was well tolerated. One patient suffered from selflimiting vomiting after consuming the phospho-soda.CONCLUSION Second-generation CCE using a low-volume preparation is useful after incomplete OC, and it allows for the detection of additional relevant findings, but cleansing efficiency could be improved.     

Does autofluorescence imaging videoendoscopy system improve the colonoscopic polyp detection rate?--a pilot study

OBJECTIVES: Colonoscopy is considered the gold standard for the detection of colorectal polyps; however, polyps can be missed with conventional white light (WL) colonoscopy. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether a newly developed autofluorescence imaging (AFI) system can detect more colorectal polyps than WL.
METHODS: A modified back-to-back colonoscopy using AFI and WL was conducted for 167 patients in the right-sided colon including cecum, ascending and transverse colon by a single experienced colonoscopist. The patient was randomized to undergo the first colonoscopy with either AFI or WL (group A: AFI-WL, group B: WL-AFI). The time needed for both insertion and examination for withdrawal and all lesions detected in the right-sided colon were recorded.
RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were randomized to group A and 84 to group B. The total number of polyps detected by AFI and WL colonoscopy was 100 and 73, respectively. The miss rate for all polyps with AFI (30%) was significantly less than that with WL (49%) ( P = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: AFI detects more polyps in the right-sided colon compared to WL colonoscopy.     

结肠镜检查中大肠腺瘤的漏诊率及漏诊相关危险因素

目的 明确结肠镜检查中大肠腺瘤的漏诊率及漏诊腺瘤特征,探讨腺瘤漏诊的相关危险因素.方法 患者在初次结肠镜检查发现并切除腺瘤后120 d内进行结肠镜复查,分析2次结肠镜检查结果.记录2次结肠镜检查所见腺瘤的特征(包括大小、部位、形态、数目及病理)、患者临床特征(包括年龄、性别、结肠镜检查原因、腹部及盆腔手术史、大肠憩室病史及是否行无痛结肠镜检查)及不同的内镜操作医师.分析不同类型腺瘤在结肠镜检查中的漏诊率以及腺瘤特征、患者临床特征和内镜医师的操作水平对腺瘤漏诊的影响.结果 809例患者中271例发生腺瘤漏诊,2次结肠镜检查共检出腺瘤2134颗,漏诊腺瘤425颗,腺瘤总漏诊率为20%(425/2134);平均患者腺瘤漏诊率为33%(271/809).腺瘤体积大者,漏诊率低(P<0.01);乙状结肠、肝曲、盲肠和升结肠部位的腺瘤以及平坦型腺瘤容易漏诊(P<0.05);患者腺瘤数越多在结肠镜检查中腺瘤漏诊率越高(P<0.01);初级内镜医师与有经验内镜医师相比,其漏诊率明显增加(P<0.01).结论 结肠镜检查中存在部分腺瘤漏诊,腺瘤漏诊与腺瘤大小、形态、部位、数目以及结肠镜检查操作医师密切相关.     

结肠镜检查中大肠腺瘤的漏诊率及漏诊相关危险因素

目的 明确结肠镜检查中大肠腺瘤的漏诊率及漏诊腺瘤特征,探讨腺瘤漏诊的相关危险因素.方法 患者在初次结肠镜检查发现并切除腺瘤后120 d内进行结肠镜复查,分析2次结肠镜检查结果.记录2次结肠镜检查所见腺瘤的特征(包括大小、部位、形态、数目及病理)、患者临床特征(包括年龄、性别、结肠镜检查原因、腹部及盆腔手术史、大肠憩室病史及是否行无痛结肠镜检查)及不同的内镜操作医师.分析不同类型腺瘤在结肠镜检查中的漏诊率以及腺瘤特征、患者临床特征和内镜医师的操作水平对腺瘤漏诊的影响.结果 809例患者中271例发生腺瘤漏诊,2次结肠镜检查共检出腺瘤2134颗,漏诊腺瘤425颗,腺瘤总漏诊率为20%(425/2134);平均患者腺瘤漏诊率为33%(271/809).腺瘤体积大者,漏诊率低(P<0.01);乙状结肠、肝曲、盲肠和升结肠部位的腺瘤以及平坦型腺瘤容易漏诊(P<0.05);患者腺瘤数越多在结肠镜检查中腺瘤漏诊率越高(P<0.01);初级内镜医师与有经验内镜医师相比,其漏诊率明显增加(P<0.01).结论 结肠镜检查中存在部分腺瘤漏诊,腺瘤漏诊与腺瘤大小、形态、部位、数目以及结肠镜检查操作医师密切相关.     

Factors affecting the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in hard-to-prepare patients: Evidence from the literature

Adequate bowel cleansing is critical for a high-quality colonoscopy because it affects diagnostic accuracy and adenoma detection. Nevertheless, almost a quarter of procedures are still carried out with suboptimal preparation, resulting in longer procedure times, higher risk of complications, and higher likelihood of missing lesions. Current guidelines recommend high-volume or low-volume polyethylene glycol(PEG)/non-PEG-based split-dose regimens. In patients who have had insufficient bowel cleans...     

High definition plus colonoscopy combined with i-scan tone enhancement vs. high definition colonoscopy for colorectal neoplasia: A randomized trial

Background

High definition endoscopy is the accepted standard in colonoscopy. However, an important problem is missed polyps.

Aims

Our objective was to assess the additional adenoma detection rate between high definition colonoscopy with tone enhancement (digital chromoendoscopy) vs. white light high definition colonoscopy.

Methods

In this prospective randomized trial patients were included to undergo a tandem colonoscopy. The first exam was a white light colonoscopy with removal of all visualized polyps. The second examination was randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio as either again white light colonoscopy (Group A) or colonoscopy with tone enhancement (Group B). Primary endpoint was the adenoma detection rate during the second withdrawal (sample size calculation – 40 per group).

Results

67 lesions (Group A: n = 34 vs. Group B: n = 33) in 80 patients (mean age 61 years, male 64%) were identified on the first colonoscopy. The second colonoscopy detected 78 additional lesions: n = 60 with tone enhancement vs. n = 18 with white light endoscopy (p < 0.001). Tone enhancement found more additional adenomas (A n = 20 vs. B n = 6, p = 0.006) and identified significantly more missed adenomas per subject (0.5 vs. 0.15, p = 0.006).

Conclusions

High definition plus colonoscopy with tone enhancement detected more adenomas missed by white light colonoscopy.     

Técnicas colonoscópicas para la detección de pólipos: un estudio egipcio

Introduction and aimsThe polyp detection rate (PDR) is defined as the percentage of colonoscopies in which one or more polyps are detected, and has been shown to be highly correlated with the adenoma detection rate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the PDR at the Endoscopy Unit of the Kasr Al-Ainy Hospital, Cairo University, Egypt, through the i-SCAN, Endocuff, and underwater colonoscopy techniques.Materials and methodsThe study was conducted on 100 Egyptian subjects over 50 years of age. Their polyp detection rate was measured through 4 different colonoscopic techniques. An equal number of patients were divided into 4 groups: i-SCAN, Endocuff, underwater colonoscopy, and controls. The control group was examined using standard white light colonoscopy. The colonoscopy evaluation included the type of agent utilized for bowel preparation, preparation grade, and colonoscopy withdrawal time.ResultsThe general PDR was 48%. The i-SCAN technique had the highest rate (56%), followed by the underwater (52%) and the Endocuff (48%) techniques.ConclusionThe i-SCAN and underwater colonoscopy techniques produced higher PDR than the Endocuff-assisted and standard techniques, but with no statistical significance.     

非酒精性脂肪性肝病及其肝纤维化程度与结直肠腺瘤性息肉的关系

目的:探讨非酒精性脂肪性肝病(NAFLD)及其肝纤维化严重程度与结直肠腺瘤性息肉之间的关系。方法:选择2018年4月—2021年4月在安徽医科大学第三附属医院消化内科住院的符合条件的结直肠腺瘤息肉患者538例为腺瘤性息肉组,其中165例为高危腺瘤。选择同期就诊的结肠镜检查正常的495例患者为对照组,比较腺瘤性息肉组及高危腺瘤性息肉组与对照组一般资料及NAFLD患者数目之间的差异。将NAFLD患者通过APRI、FIB-4、NFS三种无创肝纤维化评分系统进行分层,分为进展期纤维化组和非进展期纤维化组,探讨NAFLD患者肝纤维化严重程度与结肠腺瘤性息肉及高危腺瘤性息肉的关系。结果:NAFLD是结直肠腺瘤性息肉和高危腺瘤性息肉的独立危险因素(OR分别为1.632和1.714,95%CI1.145～2.324和1.054～2.785,P均<0.05)。在对肝纤维化严重程度进行进一步分层中,进展期肝纤维化是结直肠腺瘤及高危腺瘤的独立危险因素。而非进展期肝纤维化组与无脂肪肝组患结直肠腺瘤及高危腺瘤的风险差异无统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:NAFLD肝纤维化程度与结直肠腺瘤性息肉及高危...