Suppr超能文献

多中心、前瞻性、随机对照研究比较了在筛查人群中胶囊结肠镜与 CT 结肠成像的诊断效果(TOPAZ 研究)。

Multicentre, prospective, randomised study comparing the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography in a screening population (the TOPAZ study).

机构信息

Gastroenterology, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA

Gastroenterology, Borland Groover Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Gut. 2021 Nov;70(11):2115-2122. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322578. Epub 2020 Dec 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has shown promise for colorectal neoplasia detection compared with optical colonoscopy (OC), but has not been compared with other screening tests in average risk screening patients.

DESIGN

Patients 50 to 75 years of age (African Americans, 45-75 years) were randomised to CCE or CT colonography (CTC) and subsequent blinded OC. The primary endpoint was diagnostic yield of polyps ≥6 mm with CCE or CTC. Secondary endpoints included accuracy for size and histology, examination completeness, number/proportion of subjects with polyps and adenomas ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, subject satisfaction and safety.

RESULTS

From 320 enrolled subjects, data from 286 (89.4%) were evaluable. The proportion of subjects with any polyp ≥6 mm confirmed by OC was 31.6% for CCE versus 8.6% for CTC (pPr non-inferiority and superiority=0.999). The diagnostic yield of polyps ≥10 mm was 13.5% with CCE versus 6.3% with CTC (pPr non-inferiority=0.9954). The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥6 mm was 79.2% and 96.3% while that of CTC was 26.8% and 98.9%. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥10 mm was 85.7% and 98.2% compared with 50% and 99.1% for CTC. Both tests were well tolerated/safe.

CONCLUSION

CCE was superior to CTC for detection of polyps ≥6 mm and non-inferior for identification of polyps ≥10 mm. CCE should be considered comparable or superior to CTC as a colorectal neoplasia screening test, although neither test is as effective as OC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02754661.

摘要

目的

与光学结肠镜检查(OC)相比,结肠胶囊内镜(CCE)在结直肠肿瘤检测方面显示出了潜力,但在平均风险筛查患者中尚未与其他筛查试验进行比较。

设计

50 至 75 岁(非裔美国人,45-75 岁)的患者被随机分配到 CCE 或 CT 结肠成像(CTC)和随后的盲法 OC。主要终点是 CCE 或 CTC 检测≥6mm 息肉的诊断产量。次要终点包括大小和组织学的准确性、检查的完整性、≥6mm 和≥10mm 息肉和腺瘤的受试者数量/比例、受试者满意度和安全性。

结果

从 320 名入组患者中,286 名(89.4%)患者的数据可评估。经 OC 证实的任何≥6mm 息肉的受试者比例,CCE 为 31.6%,CTC 为 8.6%(pPr 非劣效性和优越性=0.999)。CCE 检测≥10mm 息肉的诊断产量为 13.5%,CTC 为 6.3%(pPr 非劣效性=0.9954)。CCE 检测≥6mm 息肉的敏感性和特异性分别为 79.2%和 96.3%,CTC 分别为 26.8%和 98.9%。CCE 检测≥10mm 息肉的敏感性和特异性分别为 85.7%和 98.2%,而 CTC 分别为 50%和 99.1%。两种检测方法均具有良好的耐受性/安全性。

结论

CCE 在检测≥6mm 息肉方面优于 CTC,在检测≥10mm 息肉方面非劣效于 CTC。CCE 应被视为结直肠肿瘤筛查试验与 CTC 相当或优于 CTC,尽管这两种检测方法均不如 OC 有效。

临床试验注册号

ClinicalTrials.gov 编号:NCT02754661。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验