AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized datab...AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 con- secutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light （n = 849） or HD＋ with i-Scan （n = 252） instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients＇ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy （screening, diagnos- tic or surveillance）, type of instrument used （standard white-light or HD＋ plus i-Scan）, name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or imme- diately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded. RESULTS： Eight hundred and forty-nine colonosco- pies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD＋ plus i-Scan video colonoscope, The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD＋ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences be- tween the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures （47.4%）. The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD＋ plus i-Scan mode （171/252 = 67.9%） than with the standard white-light technique （4展开更多
Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colore...Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.Methods This was a multicenter,single-blind,randomized,controlled trial with a non-inferiority design.Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination,screening,and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020.The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate(ADR),defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected.The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.Results Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled,data from 596 patients were analyzed.The ADRs were 34.5%in the SD-WL group,33.5%in the HD-WL group,and 37.5%in the HD-NBI group(P=0.72).The advanced neoplasm detection rates(ANDRs)in the three arms were 17.1%,15.5%,and 10.4%(P=0.17).No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR(ADR:34.5%vs.35.6%,P=0.79;ANDR:17.1%vs.13.0%,P=0.16,respectively).Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group(ADR:33.5%vs.37.7%,P=0.45;ANDR:15.5%vs.10.4%,P=0.18,respectively).In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses,neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL(HD-WL:OR 0.91,P=0.69;HD-NBI:OR 1.15,P=0.80).Conclusion HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients.It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL,but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future.Our study’s conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources,especially advanced imaging technologies.展开更多
AIM: To study the accuracy of using high definition(HD) scope with narrow band imaging(NBI) vs standard white light colonoscope without NBI(ST), to predict the histology of the colon polyps, particularly those < 1 ...AIM: To study the accuracy of using high definition(HD) scope with narrow band imaging(NBI) vs standard white light colonoscope without NBI(ST), to predict the histology of the colon polyps, particularly those < 1 cm.METHODS: A total of 147 African Americans patients who were referred to Howard University Hospital for screening or, diagnostic or follow up colonoscopy, during a 12-mo period in 2012 were prospectively recruited. Some patients had multiple polyps and total number of polyps was 179. Their colonoscopies were performed by 3 experienced endoscopists who determined the size and stated whether the polyps being removed were hyperplastic or adenomatous polyps using standard colonoscopes or high definition colonoscopes with NBI. The histopathologic diagnosis was reported by pathologists as part of routine care. RESULTS: Of participants in the study, 55(37%) were male and median(interquartile range) of age was 56(19-80). Demographic, clinical characteristics, past medical history of patients, and the data obtained by two instruments were not significantly different and two methods detected similar number of polyps. In ST scope 89% of polyps were < 1 cm vs 87% in HD scope(P = 0.7). The ST scope had a positive predictive value(PPV) and positive likelihood ratio(PLR) of 86% and 4.0 for adenoma compared to 74% and 2.6 for HD scope. There was a trend of higher sensitivity for HD scope(68%) compare to ST scope(53%) with almost the same specificity. The ST scope had a PPV and PLR of 38% and 1.8 for hyperplastic polyp(HPP) compared to 42% and 2.2 for HD scope. The sensitivity and specificity of two instruments for HPP diagnosis were similar.CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that HD scope was more sensitive in diagnosis of adenoma than ST scope. Clinical diagnosis of HPP with either scope is less accurate compared to adenoma. Colonoscopy diagnosis is not yet fully matched with pathologic diagnosis of colon polyp. However with the advancement of both imaging and training, it may be possible to increase the sensitivity 展开更多
AIM:To investigate the rates of polyp detection in a mixed risk population using standard definition (SDC) vs high definition colonoscopes (HDC).METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort comparative study of 3 colonosco...AIM:To investigate the rates of polyp detection in a mixed risk population using standard definition (SDC) vs high definition colonoscopes (HDC).METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort comparative study of 3 colonoscopists who each consecutively performed 150 SDC (307,200 pixel) and 150 HDC (792,576 pixels) in a community teaching hospital.RESULTS:A total of 900 colonoscopies were evaluated (mean age 56,46.8% men),450 with each resolution.Polyps of any type were detected in 46.0% of patients using SDC and 43.3% with HDC (P=0.42).There was no significant difference between the overall number of polyps,HDC (397) and SDC (410),detected among all patients examined,(P=0.73).One or more adenomatous polyps were detected in 24.2% of patients with HDC and 24.9% of patients with SDC colonoscopy (P=0.82).There was no significant difference between HDC (M=0.41) and SDC (M=0.42) regarding adenomatous polyp (P=0.88) or advanced adenoma (P=0.56) detection rate among all patients examined.CONCLUSION:HDC did not improve yield of adenomatous polyp,advanced adenoma or overall polyp detection in a population of individuals with mixed risk for colorectal cancer.展开更多
AIM:To examine performances regarding prediction of polyp histology using high-definition (HD) i-scan in a group of endoscopists with varying levels of experience. METHODS:We used a digital library of HD i-scan still ...AIM:To examine performances regarding prediction of polyp histology using high-definition (HD) i-scan in a group of endoscopists with varying levels of experience. METHODS:We used a digital library of HD i-scan still images, comprising twin pictures (surface enhancement and tone enhancement), collected at our university hospital. We defined endoscopic features of adenomatous and non-adenomatous polyps, according to the following parameters:color, surface pattern and vascular pattern. We familiarized the participating endoscopists on optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using a 20-min didactic training session. All endoscopists were asked to evaluate an image set of 50 colorectal polyps with regard to polyp histology. We classified the diagnoses into high confidence (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist could assign a diagnosis with certainty) and low confidence diagnoses (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist preferred to send the polyp for formal histology). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy per endoscopist/image were computed and differences between groups tested using independent-samples t tests. High vs low confidence diagnoses were compared using the pairedsamples t test. RESULTS:Eleven endoscopists without previous experience on optical diagnosis evaluated a total of 550 images (396 adenomatous, 154 non-adenomatous). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing adenomas were 79.3%, 85.7% and 81.1%, respectively. No significant differences were found between gastroenterologists and trainees regarding performances of optical diagnosis (mean accuracy 78.0%vs 82.9%,P = 0.098). Diminutive lesions were predicted with a lower mean accuracy as compared to non-diminutive lesions (74.2% vs 93.1%, P = 0.008). A total of 446 (81.1%) diagnoses were made with high confidence. High confidence diagnoses corresponded to a significantly higher mean accuracy than low confidence diagnoses (84.0% vs 64.3%, P = 0.008). A total of 319 (58.0%) images were evaluated as having excellent quality. Considering ex展开更多
文摘AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 con- secutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light （n = 849） or HD＋ with i-Scan （n = 252） instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients＇ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy （screening, diagnos- tic or surveillance）, type of instrument used （standard white-light or HD＋ plus i-Scan）, name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or imme- diately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded. RESULTS： Eight hundred and forty-nine colonosco- pies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD＋ plus i-Scan video colonoscope, The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD＋ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences be- tween the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures （47.4%）. The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD＋ plus i-Scan mode （171/252 = 67.9%） than with the standard white-light technique （4
基金supported by the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission(BMSTC,No.D171100002617001).
文摘Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.Methods This was a multicenter,single-blind,randomized,controlled trial with a non-inferiority design.Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination,screening,and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020.The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate(ADR),defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected.The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.Results Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled,data from 596 patients were analyzed.The ADRs were 34.5%in the SD-WL group,33.5%in the HD-WL group,and 37.5%in the HD-NBI group(P=0.72).The advanced neoplasm detection rates(ANDRs)in the three arms were 17.1%,15.5%,and 10.4%(P=0.17).No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR(ADR:34.5%vs.35.6%,P=0.79;ANDR:17.1%vs.13.0%,P=0.16,respectively).Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group(ADR:33.5%vs.37.7%,P=0.45;ANDR:15.5%vs.10.4%,P=0.18,respectively).In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses,neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL(HD-WL:OR 0.91,P=0.69;HD-NBI:OR 1.15,P=0.80).Conclusion HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients.It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL,but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future.Our study’s conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources,especially advanced imaging technologies.
基金Supported by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health(in part)Award No.G12MD007597
文摘AIM: To study the accuracy of using high definition(HD) scope with narrow band imaging(NBI) vs standard white light colonoscope without NBI(ST), to predict the histology of the colon polyps, particularly those < 1 cm.METHODS: A total of 147 African Americans patients who were referred to Howard University Hospital for screening or, diagnostic or follow up colonoscopy, during a 12-mo period in 2012 were prospectively recruited. Some patients had multiple polyps and total number of polyps was 179. Their colonoscopies were performed by 3 experienced endoscopists who determined the size and stated whether the polyps being removed were hyperplastic or adenomatous polyps using standard colonoscopes or high definition colonoscopes with NBI. The histopathologic diagnosis was reported by pathologists as part of routine care. RESULTS: Of participants in the study, 55(37%) were male and median(interquartile range) of age was 56(19-80). Demographic, clinical characteristics, past medical history of patients, and the data obtained by two instruments were not significantly different and two methods detected similar number of polyps. In ST scope 89% of polyps were < 1 cm vs 87% in HD scope(P = 0.7). The ST scope had a positive predictive value(PPV) and positive likelihood ratio(PLR) of 86% and 4.0 for adenoma compared to 74% and 2.6 for HD scope. There was a trend of higher sensitivity for HD scope(68%) compare to ST scope(53%) with almost the same specificity. The ST scope had a PPV and PLR of 38% and 1.8 for hyperplastic polyp(HPP) compared to 42% and 2.2 for HD scope. The sensitivity and specificity of two instruments for HPP diagnosis were similar.CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that HD scope was more sensitive in diagnosis of adenoma than ST scope. Clinical diagnosis of HPP with either scope is less accurate compared to adenoma. Colonoscopy diagnosis is not yet fully matched with pathologic diagnosis of colon polyp. However with the advancement of both imaging and training, it may be possible to increase the sensitivity
基金Supported by Cleveland Clinic Florida Institution Review Committee
文摘AIM:To investigate the rates of polyp detection in a mixed risk population using standard definition (SDC) vs high definition colonoscopes (HDC).METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort comparative study of 3 colonoscopists who each consecutively performed 150 SDC (307,200 pixel) and 150 HDC (792,576 pixels) in a community teaching hospital.RESULTS:A total of 900 colonoscopies were evaluated (mean age 56,46.8% men),450 with each resolution.Polyps of any type were detected in 46.0% of patients using SDC and 43.3% with HDC (P=0.42).There was no significant difference between the overall number of polyps,HDC (397) and SDC (410),detected among all patients examined,(P=0.73).One or more adenomatous polyps were detected in 24.2% of patients with HDC and 24.9% of patients with SDC colonoscopy (P=0.82).There was no significant difference between HDC (M=0.41) and SDC (M=0.42) regarding adenomatous polyp (P=0.88) or advanced adenoma (P=0.56) detection rate among all patients examined.CONCLUSION:HDC did not improve yield of adenomatous polyp,advanced adenoma or overall polyp detection in a population of individuals with mixed risk for colorectal cancer.
文摘AIM:To examine performances regarding prediction of polyp histology using high-definition (HD) i-scan in a group of endoscopists with varying levels of experience. METHODS:We used a digital library of HD i-scan still images, comprising twin pictures (surface enhancement and tone enhancement), collected at our university hospital. We defined endoscopic features of adenomatous and non-adenomatous polyps, according to the following parameters:color, surface pattern and vascular pattern. We familiarized the participating endoscopists on optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using a 20-min didactic training session. All endoscopists were asked to evaluate an image set of 50 colorectal polyps with regard to polyp histology. We classified the diagnoses into high confidence (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist could assign a diagnosis with certainty) and low confidence diagnoses (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist preferred to send the polyp for formal histology). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy per endoscopist/image were computed and differences between groups tested using independent-samples t tests. High vs low confidence diagnoses were compared using the pairedsamples t test. RESULTS:Eleven endoscopists without previous experience on optical diagnosis evaluated a total of 550 images (396 adenomatous, 154 non-adenomatous). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing adenomas were 79.3%, 85.7% and 81.1%, respectively. No significant differences were found between gastroenterologists and trainees regarding performances of optical diagnosis (mean accuracy 78.0%vs 82.9%,P = 0.098). Diminutive lesions were predicted with a lower mean accuracy as compared to non-diminutive lesions (74.2% vs 93.1%, P = 0.008). A total of 446 (81.1%) diagnoses were made with high confidence. High confidence diagnoses corresponded to a significantly higher mean accuracy than low confidence diagnoses (84.0% vs 64.3%, P = 0.008). A total of 319 (58.0%) images were evaluated as having excellent quality. Considering ex
