Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jan;18(1):158-162.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.015. Epub 2019 Jan 17.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Mucosal exposure devices improve detection of lesions during colonoscopy and have reduced examination times in uncontrolled studies. We performed a randomized trial of Endocuff Vision vs standard colonoscopy to compare differences in withdrawal time (the primary end point). We proposed that Endocuff Vision would allow complete mucosal inspection in a shorter time without impairing lesion detection.
Adults older than 40 years undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopies were randomly assigned to the Endocuff group (n=101, 43.6% women) or the standard colonoscopy group (n=99; 57.6% women). One of 2 experienced endoscopists performed the colonoscopies, aiming for a thorough evaluation of the proximal sides of all haustral folds, flexures, and valves in the shortest time possible. Inspection time was measured with a stopwatch and calculated by subtracting washing, suctioning, polypectomy and biopsy times from total withdrawal time.
There were significantly fewer women in the Endocuff arm (P = .0475) but there were no other demographic differences between groups. Mean insertion time with Endocuff was 4.0 min vs 4.4 min for standard colonoscopy (P = .14). Mean inspection time with Endocuff was 6.5 min vs 8.4 min for standard colonoscopy (P < .0001). Numbers of adenomas detected per colonoscopy (1.43 vs 1.07; P = .07), adenoma detection rate (61.4% vs 52%; P = .21), number of sessile serrated polyps per colonoscopy (0.27 vs 0.21; P = .12), and sessile serrated polyp detection rate (19.8% vs 11.1%; P = .09) were all higher with Endocuff Vision. Results did not differ significantly when we controlled for age, sex, or race.
In a randomized trial, we found inclusion of Endocuff in screening or surveillance colonoscopies to decrease examination time without reducing lesion detection. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03361917.
黏膜显露装置可提高结肠镜检查中病变的检出率,并减少未经控制的研究中的检查时间。我们进行了一项随机试验,比较了内镜辅助装置(Endocuff Vision)与标准结肠镜检查在退镜时间(主要终点)方面的差异。我们假设内镜辅助装置可以在不影响病变检出率的情况下,在更短的时间内完成完整的黏膜检查。
接受筛查或监测结肠镜检查的 40 岁以上成年人被随机分配到内镜辅助装置组(n=101,43.6%为女性)或标准结肠镜检查组(n=99;57.6%为女性)。2 名经验丰富的内镜医生之一进行结肠镜检查,目标是尽可能在最短的时间内彻底评估所有襞、弯曲和瓣的近端侧。检查时间用秒表测量,通过从总退镜时间中减去冲洗、抽吸、息肉切除术和活检时间来计算。
内镜辅助装置组的女性明显较少(P=0.0475),但两组之间没有其他人口统计学差异。内镜辅助装置组的插入时间平均为 4.0 分钟,标准结肠镜检查组为 4.4 分钟(P=0.14)。内镜辅助装置组的检查时间平均为 6.5 分钟,标准结肠镜检查组为 8.4 分钟(P<0.0001)。每例结肠镜检查检出的腺瘤数(1.43 比 1.07;P=0.07)、腺瘤检出率(61.4%比 52%;P=0.21)、每例结肠镜检查检出的无蒂锯齿状息肉数(0.27 比 0.21;P=0.12)和无蒂锯齿状息肉检出率(19.8%比 11.1%;P=0.09)均较高。当我们控制年龄、性别或种族时,结果没有显著差异。
在一项随机试验中,我们发现将内镜辅助装置纳入筛查或监测结肠镜检查中,可以减少检查时间,而不降低病变检出率。ClinicalTrials.gov,编号:NCT03361917。