Chaudhary Ammad Javaid, Faisal Muhammad Saad, Sohail Abdullah, Baldwin Hope, Harris Kevin, Shahzil Muhammad, Faisal Muhammad Salman, Toiv Avi, Mullins Keith, Suresh Suraj
Department of Internal Medicine Henry Ford Hospital Detroit Michigan USA.
Department of Internal Medicine University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Iowa City Iowa USA.
JGH Open. 2025 May 14;9(5):e70173. doi: 10.1002/jgh3.70173. eCollection 2025 May.
Polyps located in less accessible areas of the colon, such as inner curves of flexures, are often difficult to visualize. Colonoscope attachments such as the Endocuff have been developed to improve the visualization of these polyps. We aimed to assess the utility of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) in the detection of tubular adenomas and sessile serrated polyps (SSP) compared to conventional colonoscopy during routine colorectal cancer screening.
This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent colorectal cancer screening with either conventional colonoscopy or EAC between November 2022 and March 2023. The primary outcomes were SSP and tubular adenoma detection rates. Secondary outcomes included total procedure time, cecal intubation time, and ileal intubation rates.
Of the 435 patients included, 189 (43%) underwent EAC, and 246 (57%) underwent conventional colonoscopy. The mean ± standard deviation number of polyps detected was 1.7 ± 2.2, the mean procedure time was 18.7 ± 7.5 min, and the mean cecal intubation time was 4.4 ± 3.3 min, with no significant differences between groups. A smaller proportion of patients in the EAC group had successful ileal intubation (14% vs. 55%; < 0.01). The tubular adenoma detection rate was similar between EAC and conventional colonoscopy (41% vs. 39%; = 0.70), but the SSP detection rate was significantly higher with EAC (16% vs. 8.5%; < 0.01).
EAC may enhance the detection of difficult-to-visualize SSPs during screening colonoscopies without affecting overall procedure time. However, physicians should consider the examination indication when selecting EAC, as ileal intubation may be more challenging.
位于结肠较难触及区域(如弯曲部内缘)的息肉通常难以可视化。已开发出如Endocuff等结肠镜附件以改善这些息肉的可视化效果。我们旨在评估在常规结直肠癌筛查期间,与传统结肠镜检查相比,Endocuff辅助结肠镜检查(EAC)在检测管状腺瘤和无蒂锯齿状息肉(SSP)方面的效用。
这项回顾性队列研究纳入了2022年11月至2023年3月期间接受传统结肠镜检查或EAC进行结直肠癌筛查的患者。主要结局为SSP和管状腺瘤的检出率。次要结局包括总操作时间、盲肠插管时间和回肠插管率。
在纳入的435例患者中,189例(43%)接受了EAC,246例(57%)接受了传统结肠镜检查。检测到的息肉平均数量±标准差为1.7±2.2个,平均操作时间为18.7±7.5分钟,平均盲肠插管时间为4.4±3.3分钟,两组之间无显著差异。EAC组成功进行回肠插管的患者比例较小(14%对55%;P<0.01)。EAC和传统结肠镜检查的管状腺瘤检出率相似(41%对39%;P = 0.70),但EAC的SSP检出率显著更高(16%对8.5%;P<0.01)。
EAC可能会在不影响总体操作时间的情况下,提高筛查结肠镜检查中难以可视化的SSP的检出率。然而,医生在选择EAC时应考虑检查指征,因为回肠插管可能更具挑战性。