Adenoma detection by Endocuff-assisted versus standard colonoscopy in an organized screening program: the "ItaVision" randomized controlled trial.
Journal
Endoscopy
ISSN: 1438-8812
Titre abrégé: Endoscopy
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0215166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2022
02 2022
Historique:
aheadofprint:
01
02
2021
pubmed:
2
2
2021
medline:
26
3
2022
entrez:
1
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Endocuff Vision device (Arc Medical Design Ltd., Leeds, UK) has been shown to increase mucosal exposure, and consequently adenoma detection rate (ADR), during colonoscopy. This nationwide multicenter study assessed possible benefits and harms of using Endocuff Vision in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program. Patients undergoing colonoscopy after a FIT-positive test were randomized 1:1 to undergo Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy or standard colonoscopy, stratified by sex, age, and screening history. Primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR stratified by endoscopists' ADR, advanced ADR (AADR), adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), withdrawal time, and adverse events. 1866 patients were enrolled across 13 centers. After exclusions, 1813 (mean age 60.1 years; male 53.8 %) were randomized (908 Endocuff Vision, 905 standard colonoscopy). ADR was significantly higher in the Endocuff Vision arm (47.8 % vs. 40.8 %; relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.30), with no differences between arms regarding size or morphology. When stratifying for endoscopists' ADR, only low detectors (ADR < 33.3 %) showed a statistically significant ADR increase (Endocuff Vision 41.1 % [95 %CI 35.7-46.7] vs. standard colonoscopy 26.0 % [95 %CI 21.3-31.4]). AADR (24.8 % vs. 20.5 %, RR 1.21, 95 %CI 1.02-1.43) and APC (0.94 vs. 0.77; Endocuff Vision increased ADR in a FIT-based screening program by improving examination of the whole colonic mucosa. Utility was highest among endoscopists with a low ADR.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Endocuff Vision device (Arc Medical Design Ltd., Leeds, UK) has been shown to increase mucosal exposure, and consequently adenoma detection rate (ADR), during colonoscopy. This nationwide multicenter study assessed possible benefits and harms of using Endocuff Vision in a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program.
METHODS
Patients undergoing colonoscopy after a FIT-positive test were randomized 1:1 to undergo Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy or standard colonoscopy, stratified by sex, age, and screening history. Primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes were ADR stratified by endoscopists' ADR, advanced ADR (AADR), adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), withdrawal time, and adverse events.
RESULTS
1866 patients were enrolled across 13 centers. After exclusions, 1813 (mean age 60.1 years; male 53.8 %) were randomized (908 Endocuff Vision, 905 standard colonoscopy). ADR was significantly higher in the Endocuff Vision arm (47.8 % vs. 40.8 %; relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.30), with no differences between arms regarding size or morphology. When stratifying for endoscopists' ADR, only low detectors (ADR < 33.3 %) showed a statistically significant ADR increase (Endocuff Vision 41.1 % [95 %CI 35.7-46.7] vs. standard colonoscopy 26.0 % [95 %CI 21.3-31.4]). AADR (24.8 % vs. 20.5 %, RR 1.21, 95 %CI 1.02-1.43) and APC (0.94 vs. 0.77;
CONCLUSION
Endocuff Vision increased ADR in a FIT-based screening program by improving examination of the whole colonic mucosa. Utility was highest among endoscopists with a low ADR.
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03612674']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
138-147Investigateurs
Angelo Bellumat
(A)
Andrea Buda
(A)
Elisabetta Buscarini
(E)
Lucas Cavallaro
(L)
Aldo Ceriani
(A)
Franca De Lazzari
(F)
Angelo Dezi
(A)
Ennio Guido
(E)
Giuseppe Iabichino
(G)
Claudio Londoni
(C)
Nicoletta Merlini
(N)
Francesca Murer
(F)
Neri Nardini
(N)
Ephrem Ntakirutimana
(E)
Emma Paulon
(E)
Anna Rostello
(A)
Marco Silvani
(M)
Nicoletta Stefani
(N)
Paolo Viaggi
(P)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.