Search Results (15)

Background/Objectives: White light imaging (WLI) of colonoscopy has a 26% adenoma miss rate. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an additional 30 s (Add-30s) observation of the right-sided colon using a novel system (EVIS X1; Olympus Co.) with texture and color enhancement imaging (TXI). Methods: We reviewed 515 patients who underwent colonoscopy with Add-30s TXI between February 2021 and December 2023 at three affiliated hospitals. After initial right-sided colon observation with WLI, the colonoscope was reinserted into the cecum, and the right-sided colon was re-observed with Add-30s TXI. Adenoma and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rate (ASDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) were examined. Multivariate analysis identified factors influencing lesion detection using the Add-30s TXI. The difference in WLI and TXI between the novel and previous scopes was performed using propensity score matching (PSM). The efficacy of WLI with the novel system was compared to that of the previous system. Results: Among the 515 cases, Add-30s TXI observation increased right-sided ADR and ASDR by 7.4% and 9.5%, respectively. The multivariate analysis showed novel scope as an independent factor for adenoma and SSL detection (odds ratio: 2.41, p < 0.01). Right-sided ADR and ASDR for Add-30s TXI were significantly higher in the novel scope than the previous scope (ADR, 25.2% vs. 15.3%; p = 0.04; ASDR, 32.4% vs. 18.9%; p = 0.02). ASDR for WLI observation was significantly higher in the novel system than the previous system (34.8% vs. 25.9%; p < 0.01). Conclusions: Add-30s TXI significantly improved the detection of missed adenomas and SSLs in the right-sided colon. Full article

Aim: Endo-Wing™ is a soft silicone device with six wing-like projections attached at the end of the colonoscope that provides superior visualization by flattening the colonic fold and helps to maintain a central view of the colonoscope during withdrawal. This study aims to compare the adenoma detection rate (ADR) between standard colonoscopy and Endo-Wing™-assisted colonoscopy. Methods: This is a single-center, single-blind, parallel-group, randomized, actively controlled, exploratory clinical trial conducted between July 2019 and April 2020. Participants aged 45 and above who were symptomatic of colorectal cancer (CRC) or with a history of adenoma and under active surveillance were included. Exclusion criteria included colonic strictures, tumors, active colitis, a previous history of polyposis syndrome, colostomy/ileostomy, or a BPPS score of 0. Participants were subsequently randomized to receive standard colonoscopy (n = 96) or Endo-Wing™-assisted colonoscopy (n = 96) at a 1:1 ratio using a central block randomization method with varying block sizes. The primary endpoint was the ADR, and the differences between the two groups were evaluated using univariable statistical methods. Results: The ADR, the number of adenomas, and the size of adenomas in the Endo-Wing™-assisted colonoscopy group were significantly higher compared to standard colonoscopy (p = 0.005, 0.035, and 0.035, respectively). Cecal intubation rates were similar in both groups (p > 0.999). The proportions of colonoscopy requiring increased sedation and standard sedation were similar in both groups (p = 0.613). No adverse effects of bleeding, perforation, and device dislodgement were reported in both groups. Conclusions: This study concludes that Endo-Wing™-assisted colonoscopy improves the ADR compared to standard colonoscopy. Full article

Objectives: To assess the impact of bowel cleansing quality on polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) and explore predictors of lesion detection rate in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing 1L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L PEG+ASC) vs. 4L PEG as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Results: PDR was significantly higher (35.6% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.013), and ADR was higher even if not significantly (25.6% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.153) in patients with Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) ≥6 over BBPS <6. Comparing patients with BBPS = 9 over BBPS = 7–8, no significant differences were found in PDR (34.5% vs. 38.4%, p = 0.483) nor ADR (24.1% vs. 27.2%, p = 0.553). At multivariable regression analysis, older age (OR = 1.042, 95%CI = 1.021–1.063; p < 0.001), shorter intubation time (OR = 0.891, 95%CI = 0.816–0.972; p = 0.010), higher withdrawal time (OR = 1.171, 95%CI = 1.094–1.253; p < 0.001) and full consumption of the first dose (OR = 8.368, 95%CI = 1.025–68.331; p = 0.047) were independently associated with ADR. Conclusions: This post-hoc analysis of a RCT showed that excellent cleansing (BBPS = 9) over high-quality cleansing (BBPS = 7–8) does not significantly improve PDR or ADR. Neither cleansing success nor preparation types were independently associated with ADR. Compliance with bowel preparation, timing of colonoscopy and withdrawal time are key elements for adequate ADR with potential implications for reducing interval colorectal cancer. Full article

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a major global health burden, necessitating continuous advancements in diagnostic methodologies. Traditional screening techniques, including barium enema and fecal occult blood tests, have been progressively replaced by more precise modalities, such as colonoscopy, liquid biopsy, and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted imaging. Objective: This review explores the evolution of CRC diagnostic tools, from conventional imaging methods to cutting-edge AI-driven approaches, emphasizing their clinical utility, cost-effectiveness, and integration into multidisciplinary healthcare settings. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Medline, and Scopus databases, selecting studies that evaluate various CRC diagnostic tools, including endoscopic advancements, liquid biopsy applications, and AI-assisted imaging techniques. Key inclusion criteria include studies on diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, clinical outcomes, and economic feasibility. Results: AI-assisted colonoscopy has demonstrated superior adenoma detection rates (ADR), reduced interobserver variability, and enhanced real-time lesion classification, offering a cost-effective alternative to liquid biopsy, particularly in high-volume healthcare institutions. While liquid biopsy provides a non-invasive means of molecular profiling, it remains cost-intensive and requires frequent testing, making it more suitable for post-treatment surveillance and high-risk patient monitoring. Conclusions: The future of CRC diagnostics lies in a hybrid model, leveraging AI-assisted endoscopic precision with molecular insights from liquid biopsy. This integration is expected to revolutionize early detection, risk stratification, and personalized treatment approaches, ultimately improving patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency. Full article

Introduction: High-quality colonoscopy is influenced by several factors, with the adenoma detection rate (ADR) being one of the most studied indicators. A strong inverse relationship exists between ADR and the risk of developing post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC), prompting the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to recommend a minimum ADR of 25%. In contrast, there is limited evidence supporting the clinical significance of the serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR), and no specific benchmark was established until a very recent update from the American societies. Main paper: This review examines the factors that influence ADR and SPDR, offering tips to improve these metrics. Effective interventions for enhancing ADR include training, colonoscopy feedback, adequate bowel preparation, longer withdrawal time, water-aided colonoscopy, right colon second look, and chromoendoscopy. The use of cap, devices, and specialized scopes also show promise, though these are often at higher costs. Artificial intelligence has generated great optimism, especially following positive results from early randomized controlled trials; however, its effectiveness has been less pronounced in real-world settings. Conclusions: Many of these approaches require further trials and meta-analyses to establish their ultimate efficacy. Moreover, future clinical head-to-head studies will help to identify the most effective interventions for reducing colorectal cancer incidence and the risk of PCCRC. Full article

Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention depends on effective colonoscopy; yet variability in adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and missed lesions remain significant hurdles. Artificial intelligence-powered computer-aided detection (CADe) systems offer promising advancements in enhancing polyp detection. This review examines the role of CADe in improving ADR and reducing adenoma miss rates (AMRs) while addressing its broader clinical implications. CADe has demonstrated consistent improvements in ADRs and AMRs; largely by detecting diminutive polyps, but shows limited efficacy in identifying advanced adenomas or sessile serrated lesions. Challenges such as operator deskilling and the need for enhanced algorithms persist. Combining CADe with adjunctive techniques has shown potential for further optimizing performance. While CADe has standardized detection quality; its long-term impact on CRC incidence and mortality remains inconclusive. Future research should focus on refining CADe technology and assessing its effectiveness in reducing the global burden of CRC. Full article

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in Kuwait. The effectiveness of colonoscopy in preventing CRC is dependent on a high adenoma detection rate (ADR). Computer-aided detection can identify (CADe) and characterize polyps in real time and differentiate benign from neoplastic polyps, but its role remains unclear in screening colonoscopy. Methods: This was a randomized-controlled trial (RCT) enrolling patients 45 years of age or older presenting for outpatient screening or surveillance colonoscopy (Kuwait clinical trial registration number 2047/2022). Patients with a history of inflammatory bowel disease, alarm symptoms, familial polyposis syndrome, colon resection, or poor bowel preparation were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned to either high-definition white-light (HD-WL) colonoscopy (standard of care) or HD-WL colonoscopy with the CADe system. The primary outcome was ADR. The secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), adenoma per colonoscopy (APC), polyp per colonoscopy (PPC), and accuracy of polyp characterization. Results: From 1 September 2022 to 1 March 2023, 102 patients were included and allocated to either the HD-WL colonoscopy group (n = 51) or CADe group (n = 51). The mean age was 52.8 years (SD 8.2), and males represented 50% of the cohort. Screening for CRC accounted for 94.1% of all examinations, while the remaining patients underwent surveillance colonoscopy. A total of 121 polyps were detected with an average size of 4.18 mm (SD 5.1), the majority being tubular adenomas with low-grade dysplasia (47.1%) and hyperplastic polyps (46.3%). There was no difference in the overall bowel preparation, insertion and withdrawal times, and adverse events between the two arms. ADR (primary outcome) was non-significantly higher in the CADe group compared to the HD colonoscopy group (47.1% vs. 37.3%, p = 0.3). Among the secondary outcomes, PDR (78.4% vs. 56.8%, p = 0.02) and PPC (1.35 vs. 0.96, p = 0.04) were significantly higher in the CADe group, but APC was not (0.75 vs. 0.51, p = 0.09). Accuracy in characterizing polyp histology was similar in both groups. Conclusions: In this RCT, the artificial intelligence system showed a non-significant trend towards improving ADR among Kuwaiti patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy compared to HD-WL colonoscopy alone, while it significantly improved the detection of diminutive polyps. A larger multicenter study is required to detect the true effect of CADe on the detection of adenomas. Full article

Background: The expected and optimal adenoma detection rate (ADR) is not well characterized in Lynch syndrome (LS). The aim of this study is to determine the ADR, the overall colorectal neoplasia detection rate (CNDR), proximal serrated detection rate (PSDR), and CRC detection rate (CRCDR) in an LS cohort. Methods: A retrospective study was performed of individuals with LS who were evaluated at a single tertiary care center from May 2001 to September 2023 (n = 542). Data from procedure and pathology reports were collected along with relevant demographic, clinical history, and family history data. Fisher’s exact test and the Kruskal–Wallis test were used to assess factors associated with colorectal neoplasia. Results: Amongst 542 individuals with LS, 352 met the inclusion criteria, and their 1296 colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies were used for analysis. The cohort was primarily female (64.5%), white (87.5%), and privately insured (76.1%), with a near even distribution across genotypes. CNDR was 27.9%, ADR was 21.4%, PSDR was 7.7%, and CRCDR was 1.5%. Advanced age, Medicare insurance, prior colonic resection, and prior history of non-CRC were significantly associated with an increased CNDR and ADR (p < 0.05). PSDR remained constant with age. There was no association with genotype, biological sex, race, smoking, BMI, aspirin use, nor family history. Conclusions: Despite frequent colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies, individuals with LS maintain a high rate of colorectal neoplasia, primarily driven by increased detection of adenomas with advancing age. Neoplasia rates may serve as helpful “ballpark rates” for endoscopists performing colonoscopies/sigmoidoscopies in LS. However, further studies need to determine whether neoplasia rates are predictive of CRC risk and outcomes in LS. Full article

Background/Aims: A longer cecal intubation time (CIT) occurs during colonoscopy under difficult insertion conditions, which may hinder meticulous mucosal observation. However, whether a longer CIT has detrimental effects on the detection of adenomas remains unclear. We evaluated the effects of CIT on the detection and miss rates of colorectal neoplasms in asymptomatic participants. Methods: Healthy examinees who underwent colonoscopy between March and July 2011, August 2015, and December 2016 were retrospectively enrolled. The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR) across CIT quartiles, while the secondary outcomes included the mean number of adenomas, advanced ADR (AADR), clinically significant serrated lesion (CSSP) detection, adenoma miss rate (AMR), miss rate of CSSPs and any colorectal neoplasms, and the mean number of missed colorectal neoplasms in relation to CIT. Results: Overall, 12,402 participants were classified into quartiles according to the CIT. The longer the CIT, the lower the ADR (p < 0.001), AADR (p = 0.004), and mean number of adenomas (p < 0.001). The CSSP detection rate was not associated with CIT. On follow-up colonoscopy, AMR showed marginal increase with longer CIT (p = 0.065). The missed rates of CSSPs (p = 0.002) and colorectal neoplasms (p = 0.001) also increased with longer CIT. In the multivariate analysis, CIT was significantly associated with ADR, AADR, and AMR. Conclusions: Longer CIT was associated with lower ADR and higher AMR. Meticulous inspection is important for high-quality colonoscopy, particularly in patients requiring a longer CIT. Full article

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is challenging to measure, given its dependency on pathology reporting. Polyp detection rate (PDR) (percentage of screening colonoscopies detecting a polyp) is a proposed alternative to overcome this issue. Overall PDR from all colonoscopies is a relatively novel concept, with no large-scale studies comparing overall PDR with screening-only PDR. The aim of the study was to compare PDR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic indications with overall PDR and evaluate any correlation between individual endoscopist PDR by indication to determine if overall PDR can be a valuable surrogate for screening PDR. Our study analyzed a prospectively collected national endoscopy database maintained by the National Institute of Health from 2009 to 2014. Out of 354,505 colonoscopies performed between 2009–2014, 298,920 (n = 110,794 average-risk screening, n = 83,556 average-risk surveillance, n = 104,770 diagnostic) met inclusion criteria. The median screening PDR was 25.45 (IQR 13.15–39.60), comparable with the median overall PDR of 24.01 (IQR 11.46–35.86, p = 0.21). Median surveillance PDR was higher at 33.73 (IQR 16.92–47.01), and median diagnostic PDR was lower at 19.35 (IQR 9.66–29.17), compared with median overall PDR 24.01 (IQR 11.46–35.86; p < 0.01). The overall PDR showed excellent concordance with screening, surveillance, and diagnostic PDR (r > 0.85, p < 0.01, 2-tailed). The overall PDR is a reliable and pragmatic surrogate for screening PDR and can be measured in real time, irrespective of colonoscopy indication. Full article

In the present prospective case series study, we investigated the lesion-detection ability of an AI-equipped colonoscopy as an addition to colonoscopy (CS) screening. Participants were 100 patients aged ≥20 years who had not undergone CS at the study site in the last 3 years and passed the exclusion criteria. CS procedures were conducted using conventional white light imaging and computer-aided detection (CADe). Adenoma detection rate (ADR; number of individuals with at least one adenoma detected) was compared between the conventional group and the CADe group. Of the 170 lesions identified, the ADR of the CADe group was significantly higher than the ADR of the conventional group (69% vs. 61%, p = 0.008). For the expert endoscopists, although ADR did not differ significantly, the mean number of detected adenomas per procedure (MAP) was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (1.7 vs. 1.45, p = 0.034). For non-expert endoscopists, ADR and MAP were significantly higher in the CADe group than in the conventional group (ADR 69.5% vs. 56.6%, p = 0.016; MAP 1.66 vs. 1.11, p < 0.001). These results indicate that the CADe function in CS screening has a positive effect on adenoma detection, especially for non-experts. Full article

Artificial-intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems have developed remarkably in recent years. These systems can help increase the adenoma detection rate (ADR), an important quality indicator in colonoscopies. While there have been many still-image-based studies on the usefulness of CAD, few have reported on its usefulness using actual clinical videos. However, no studies have compared the CAD group and control groups using the exact same case videos. This study aimed to determine whether CAD or endoscopists were superior in identifying colorectal neoplastic lesions in videos. In this study, we examined 34 lesions from 21 cases. CAD performed better than four of the six endoscopists (three experts and three beginners), including all the beginners. The time to lesion detection with beginners and experts was 2.147 ± 1.118 s and 1.394 ± 0.805 s, respectively, with significant differences between beginners and experts (p < 0.001) and between beginners and CAD (both p < 0.001). The time to lesion detection was significantly shorter for experts and CAD than for beginners. No significant difference was found between experts and CAD (p = 1.000). CAD could be useful as a diagnostic support tool for beginners to bridge the experience gap with experts. Full article

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer in men (after prostate and lung cancers) and in women (after breast and lung cancer). It is the second cause of cancer death in men (after lung cancer) and the third one in women (after breast and lung cancers). It is estimated that, in EU-27 countries in 2020, colorectal cancer accounted for 12.7% of all new cancer diagnoses and 12.4% of all deaths due to cancer. Our study aims to assess the opportunistic colorectal cancer screening by colonoscopy in a private hospital. A secondary objective of this study is to analyse the adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), and colorectal cancer (CRC) detection rate. We designed a retrospective single-centre study in the Gastroenterology Department of Saint Mary Hospital. The study population includes all individuals who performed colonoscopies in 2 years, January 2019–December 2020, addressed to our department by their family physician or came by themselves for a colonoscopy. One thousand seven hundred seventy-eight asymptomatic subjects underwent a colonoscopy for the first time. The mean age was 59.0 ± 10.9, 59.5% female. Eight hundred seventy-three polyps were found in 525 patients. Five hundred and twenty-five had at least one polyp, 185 patients had two polyps, 87 had three polyps, and 40 patients had more than three polyps. The PDR was 49.1%, ADR 39.0%, advanced adenomas in 7.9%, and carcinomas were found in 5.4% of patients. In a country without any colorectal cancer screening policy, polyps were found in almost half of the 1778 asymptomatic patients evaluated in a single private center, 39% of cases adenomas, and 5.4% colorectal cancer. Our study suggests starting screening colonoscopy at the age of 45. A poor bowel preparation significantly impacted the adenoma detection rate. Full article

Randomized control trials and meta-analyses comparing colonoscopies with and without computer-aided detection (CADe) assistance showed significant increases in adenoma detection rates (ADRs) with CADe. A major limitation of CADe is its false positives (FPs), ranked 3rd in importance among 59 research questions in a modified Delphi consensus review. The definition of FPs varies. One commonly used definition defines an FP as an activation of the CADe system, irrespective of the number of frames or duration of time, not due to any polypoid or nonpolypoid lesions. Although only 0.07 to 0.2 FPs were observed per colonoscopy, video analysis studies using FPs as the primary outcome showed much higher numbers of 26 to 27 per colonoscopy. Most FPs were of short duration (91% < 0.5 s). A higher number of FPs was also associated with suboptimal bowel preparation. The appearance of FPs can lead to user fatigue. The polypectomy of FPs results in increased procedure time and added use of resources. Re-training the CADe algorithms is one way to reduce FPs but is not practical in the clinical setting during colonoscopy. Water exchange (WE) is an emerging method that the colonoscopist can use to provide salvage cleaning during insertion. We discuss the potential of WE for reducing FPs as well as the augmentation of ADRs through CADe. Full article

Insulin is a debatable risk factor for colon adenoma (Ad) among type II diabetes mellitus (DM II) patients. Obesity is an important confounding variable. The study involved chart review of DM II patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. Study population was divided into obese [body mass index (BMI)≥30] and nonobese (BMI<30) groups which were further divided into insulin and non-insulin subgroup. Colonoscopy and pathology reports were used to calculate Ad detection rate (ADR) and AAd detection rate (AADR). A total of 538 subjects satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study population composed of 52.8% obese and 47.2% non-obese subjects. Obese group had 28.9% insulin and 71.1% non-insulin subjects. Non-obese group composed of 29.9% insulin and 70.1% non-insulin subjects. ADR for non-obese insulin and non-insulin subgroup was 31.6% and 37.1% respectively. AADR for non-obese insulin and non-insulin subgroup was 13.2% and 11.2% respectively. ADR for obese insulin and non-insulin subgroup was 41.5% and 34.2% respectively. AADR for obese insulin and non-insulin subgroup was 15.9% and 16.3% respectively. Insulin exposure lacked statistically significant association with ADR or AADR among obese and non-obese DM II subjects. Full article