High-definition Colonoscopy Research Articles

Dye-based chromoendoscopy detects more neoplasia than white light endoscopy in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and IBD.

Background and study aims Patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have a high risk of colorectal cancer. There is no agreement on the best technique for surveillance for colorectal neoplasia. We aimed to assess whether chromoendoscopy and/or high-definition endoscopy is associated with increased detection of neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis undergoing surveillance compared with when they were not used. Patients and methods This was a single-center, retrospective, observational study designed to analyze differences in the detection of neoplasia (adenomatous and serrated) among patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and IBD who underwent annual surveillance between 2010 and 2020. Multilevel logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders. Results Ninety-one patients were identified, resulting in 359 colonoscopies with 360 person-years of follow up. Over the study period, 22 of 91 patients (24%) had at least one neoplastic lesion identified; however, the mean neoplastic lesion rate was 0.87 (54/63) for the primary sclerosing cholangitis-ulcerative colitis subgroup compared with 0.24 (4/17) for the primary sclerosing cholangitis-Crohn's disease subgroup. Chromoendoscopy was associated with a significantly higher detection rate for neoplasia (odds ratio [OR] 5.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-14.9, P =0.001), and this association remained after adjusting for confounders, including high-definition endoscopy. High-definition endoscopes had a higher rate of neoplasia detection, but the significance was lost after adjustment for confounders, including chromoendoscopy (OR 1.93, 95% CI 0.69-5.40, P =0.21). Conclusions Chromoendoscopy is associated with a higher detection rate for neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and IBD even with high-definition colonoscopes.

Endocuff With or Without Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Colonoscopy in Detection of Colorectal Adenoma: A Randomized Colonoscopy Trial.

Both artificial intelligence (AI) and distal attachment devices have been shown to improve adenoma detection rate and reduce miss rate during colonoscopy. We studied the combined effect of Endocuff and AI on enhancing detection rates of various colonic lesions. This was a 3-arm prospective randomized colonoscopy study involving patients aged 40 years or older. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to undergo Endocuff with AI, AI alone, or standard high-definition (HD) colonoscopy. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR) between the Endocuff-AI and AI groups while secondary outcomes included detection rates of polyp (PDR), sessile serrated lesion (sessile detection rate [SDR]), and advanced adenoma (advanced adenoma detection rate) between the 2 groups. A total of 682 patients were included (mean age 65.4 years, 52.3% male), with 53.7% undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy. The ADR for the Endocuff-AI, AI, and HD groups was 58.7%, 53.8%, and 46.3%, respectively, while the corresponding PDR was 77.0%, 74.0%, and 61.2%. A significant increase in ADR, PDR, and SDR was observed between the Endocuff-AI and AI groups (ADR difference: 4.9%, 95% CI: 1.4%-8.2%, P = 0.03; PDR difference: 3.0%, 95% CI: 0.4%-5.8%, P = 0.04; SDR difference: 6.4%, 95% CI: 3.4%-9.7%, P < 0.01). Both Endocuff-AI and AI groups had a higher ADR, PDR, SDR, and advanced adenoma detection rate than the HD group (all P < 0.01). Endocuff in combination with AI further improves various colonic lesion detection rates when compared with AI alone.

Dysplasia detection rates under a surveillance program in a tertiary referral center for inflammatory bowel diseases: Real-world data

Background and aimsSurveillance colonoscopies are crucial for high-risk patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) to detect colorectal carcinoma (CRC). However, there is no established quality metric for dysplasia detection rate (DDR) in IBD surveillance. This study assessed the DDR in a dedicated surveillance program at a tertiary referral center for IBD. MethodsConsecutive patients with quiescent colitis were enrolled in a cross-sectional study evaluating DDR. High-definition colonoscopy with dye chromoendoscopy (DCE) was performed by a specialized operator. Advanced dysplasia (AD) was defined as low-grade dysplasia ≥ 10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or colorectal cancer. Risk factors for dysplasia detection were analyzed. ResultsIn total, 119 patients underwent 151 procedures, identifying 206 lesions, of which 40 dysplastic with seven AD . Per-lesion and per-procedure DDR were 19.4 % and 20.5 %, respectively. The per-procedure AD detection rate (ADDR) was 4.6 %. A Kudo pit pattern of II-V had a sensitivity of 92.5 % for dysplasia detection but a false positive rate of 64.8 % (p < 0.001). Age at diagnosis and at index colonoscopy and past or indefinite dysplasia were associated with per-procedure dysplasia detection. ConclusionsIn a real-world setting, a dedicated surveillance program achieved a high DDR. We suggest that optimal DDR in high-risk IBD patients be defined and implemented as a standardized quality measure for surveillance programs.

Economic impact of implementing optical diagnosis with a "resect and discard" strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Findings from the DISCARD3 study.

Advances in endoscopic technology, such as narrow band imaging and high definition colonoscopes, offer the potential for optical diagnosis (OD) with a "resect and discard" (RD) strategy for diminutive (≤5mm) and small (6-9mm) colorectal polyps. This could help alleviate the huge cost and time burden required for histopathology. The aim of this study is to conduct an economic analysis of a RD strategy within the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). A decision tree was designed to compare a RD strategy with standard histopathology for patients included in the DISCARD3 study and was extrapolated to a national BCSP patient cohort. Of the 525 patients in the DISCARD3 study, 354 were assessed for surveillance intervals (after excluding cases with colorectal cancer and at least one polyp >10 mm). 269/354 cases had polyps of which, 182 had only diminutive polyps, 77 had both small and diminutive polyps, and 10 had only small polyps. Surveillance interval concordance was 97.9% in patients with at least 1 diminutive polyp and 98.7% in patients with at least 1 diminutive or small polyp. In DISCARD3, a RD approach would reduce overall direct healthcare costs by £35,468.8 (-72.3%) for patients with diminutive polyps or by £42,666.2 (-75.0%) for patients with diminutive or small polyps. When extrapolated to the entire English BCSP, the annual savings are almost £2.4m for patients with diminutive polyps or £3.4m for patients with diminutive or small polyps, after adjusting for the costs of an OD quality assurance process (QAP). OD with a RD strategy for diminutive and small polyps during BCSP colonoscopy would offer substantial cost savings without adversly affecting surveillance interval concordance.

Does I-Scan Improve Adenoma Detection Rate Compared to High-Definition Colonoscopy?

Please view the PDF to see the formatted meeting abstract.

Computer-aided automated diminutive colonic polyp detection in colonoscopy by using deep machine learning system; first indigenous algorithm developed in India.

Colonic polyps can be detected and resected during a colonoscopy before cancer development. However, about 1/4th of the polyps could be misseddue to their small size, location or human errors. An artificial intelligence (AI) system can improve polyp detection and reduce colorectal cancer incidence. We are developing an indigenous AI systemto detect diminutive polyps in real-life scenarios that can be compatible with any high-definition colonoscopy and endoscopic video-capture software. We trained a masked region-based convolutional neural network model to detect and localize colonic polyps. Three independent datasets of colonoscopy videos comprising 1,039 image frames were used and divided into a training dataset of 688 frames and a testing dataset of 351 frames. Of 1,039 image frames, 231 were from real-life colonoscopy videos from our centre. The rest were from publicly available image frames already modified to be directly utilizable for developing the AI system. The image frames of the testing dataset were also augmented by rotating and zooming the images to replicate real-life distortions of images seen during colonoscopy. The AI system was trained to localize the polyp by creating a 'bounding box'. It was then applied to the testing dataset to test its accuracy in detecting polyps automatically. The AI system achieved a mean average precision (equivalent to specificity) of 88.63% for automatic polyp detection. All polyps in the testing were identified by AI, i.e., nofalse-negativeresult in the testing dataset (sensitivity of 100%). The mean polyp size in the study was 5 (± 4) mm. The mean processing time per image frame was 96.4minutes. This AI system, when applied to real-life colonoscopy images, having wide variations in bowel preparation and small polyp size, can detect colonic polyps with a high degree of accuracy.

What Is the Risk? Epidemiology and Evidence for Surveillance Regimens.

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The risk for CRC is positively correlated to the duration of disease, extent of colonic involvement, and severity of inflammation. After 8 to 10 years of IBD diagnosis, the risk for CRC rises substantially and screening colonoscopy is recommended. Surveillance colonoscopy interval ranges from 1 to 5 years depending on patient and disease-specific risk factors. IBD patients with high risk factors such as having concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis, moderate-to-severe inflammation, first-degree relative with CRC at early age, or history of invisible dysplasia or high-risk visible dysplasia should undergo surveillance colonoscopy in 1 year. Meanwhile, those with minimal colonic involvement or ≥2 consecutive unremarkable examinations while in continuous remission may consider extending the surveillance interval to 5 years. Advance in colonoscopy technique such as chromoendoscopy using dyes and/or image digital processing (virtual chromoendoscopy) may enhance dysplasia detection and is the preferred method for IBD surveillance. In the era of high-definition colonoscope, the practice of obtaining extensive biopsies throughout the colon remains controversial but is generally recommended to improve the detection rate of invisible dysplasia. Endoscopic surveillance in IBD has been shown to result in earlier detection of CRC and improved prognosis.

A125 TANDEM STUDY DESIGN IS LESS LIKELY TO DEMONSTRATE IMPROVED ADENOMA DETECTION RATE THAN PARALLEL STUDY DESIGN IN THE ASSESSMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-ASSISTED COLONOSCOPY

Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials have reported that artificial intelligence (AI) improves adenoma detection rate (ADR). Different methodologies, namely parallel and tandem study designs, have been employed to evaluate the efficacy of AI-assisted colonoscopy in randomized controlled trials. In systematic reviews and meta-analyses, a pooled effect that includes both study designs have been reported. However, it is unclear whether there are inconsistencies in the reported results of these two designs. Purpose To determine if there are differences in ADR using AI-aided technologies during colonoscopy between parallel and tandem study designs Method A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October 2022) and EMBASE (1947 to October 2022) for randomized controlled trials comparing AI-assisted colonoscopy with routine high-definition colonoscopy in polyp detection was conducted. Reference lists of systematic reviews were searched for additional studies. The publications were divided based on trial design: parallel vs. tandem. Analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1 using a random effects model. Result(s) The search identified 540 articles. After screening the title and abstract for relevance, 19 randomized controlled trials involving a total of 14 657 patients were included for full-text review. Fourteen were parallel studies (14 136 patients) and 5 were tandem studies (521 patients). ADR was reported in 17 studies, and there was overall improvement in ADR with AI-assisted colonoscopy (risk ratio [RR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.22-1.44; p&amp;lt;.0001). Based on a separate pooled analyses of 13 parallel studies and 4 tandem studies, ADR significantly improved with AI assistance compared to routine colonoscopy, regardless of study design (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.24-1.47 and p&amp;lt;.0001; RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03-1.28; p=0.02, respectively). A significant increase in ADR with AI assistance were found in 84.6% (11/13) of parallel design studies, but in only 25% (1/4) of tandem studies. Image Conclusion(s) AI assistance during colonoscopy significantly increased ADR in both parallel and tandem studies; however, improvement in ADR was less likely to be seen in tandem compared to parallel studies. It remains unclear why this difference exists, but some hypotheses include smaller sample sizes in the tandem studies, significant heterogeneity in the tandem design, and differences in operator bias depending on study design. Better understanding the differences in these study designs will inform future studies of new endoscopic technologies. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

Natural history and prognosis of pediatric PSC with updates on management.

Natural history and prognosis of pediatric PSC with updates on management.

P164 Dysplasia detection rates in a surveillance program real-world data from a tertiary referral center for inflammatory bowel diseases

Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) with an increased risk of developing colorectal carcinoma should undergo periodic surveillance colonoscopies. There is no quality metric for dysplasia detection rate (DDR) in IBD surveillance. We evaluated DDR in a dedicated surveillance program at a tertiary IBD referral center. Methods This cross-sectional study assessed DDR among consecutive patients with quiescent colitis enrolled in our surveillance program. Patients underwent high-definition colonoscopy with dye chromoendoscopy (DCE). A single specialized operator performed the procedures. Advanced dysplasia (AD) was defined as low-grade dysplasia ≥ 10mm, high-grade dysplasia, or colorectal cancer. We evaluated risk factors for dysplasia detection. Results Overall, 119 patients [female: 39.5%; median age: 54 years (IQR 43-66); median disease duration: 20 years (IQR 14-29)] underwent 151 procedures that revealed 206 lesions, of which 40 were dysplastic, and seven were considered AD. Per-procedure and per-lesion DDR were: 20.5%, and 19.4%, respectively. Per-procedure AD detection rate (ADDR) was 4.6%. Per-procedure dysplasia detection was associated with increased age at diagnosis at the index colonoscopy and past dysplasia or indefinite dysplasia, however, on multivariable analysis, only past dysplasia or indefinite dysplasia maintained a significant association (AdjOR 4.84, 95% CI 1.52-15.45, p=0.008). A Kudo pit pattern of II-V had a sensitivity of 92.5% for per-lesion dysplasia detection but a false positive rate of 64.8% (p&amp;lt;0.001). Conclusion DDR in a dedicated surveillance program in a real-world setting reached 20%. DDR should be considered a quality measure while surveying high-risk patients with IBD.

Comparison of adenoma detection rate between high-definition colonoscopes with different fields of view: 170 degrees versus 140 degrees

In newer generation colonoscopes, the field of view (FOV) varies approximately between 170° and 140°, depending on the type of colonoscopy. To the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated whether the visual field difference of the colonoscope affects quality indicators, such as the adenoma detection rate (ADR), without using additional devices to expand the FOV in colonoscopes with the same resolution. This study aimed to investigate the difference in quality indicators, such as ADR, between 170° and 140° FOV in colonoscopes with the same high-definition resolution. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent screening or surveillance colonoscopy at the Dong-A University Hospital in Busan, South Korea, between March 2021 and February 2022. We calculated the overall ADR ratios for patients who underwent colonoscopy with 140° and 170° FOV. Polyp detection rate (PDR), sessile serrated PDR, and advanced neoplasia detection rate were calculated for each group. Factors associated with adenoma detection were identified using a logistical regression analysis. A total of 1711 patients were included in the study (838 patients in the 170° group and 873 patients in the 140° group). ADR (43.79 vs 41.92%, P = .434) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. The generational differences were not statistically significant either for PDR (56.44 vs 53.49%, P = .220), sessile serrated PDR (1.19 vs 0.92%, P = .575), or advanced neoplasia detection rate (5.00 vs 4.58%, P = .735). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that, age, male sex, and long withdrawal time were the most significant factors affecting adenoma detection. This study revealed that there were no differences in ADR while employing high definition colonoscopes with a 170° FOV and a 140° FOV.

WEO Newsletter.

WEO Newsletter.

Recent advances in surveillance colonoscopy for dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has a global presence with rapidly increasing incidence and prevalence. Patients with IBD including those with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease have a higher risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) compared to the general population. Risk factors for CRC in patients with IBD include long disease duration, extensive colitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, family history of CRC, stricture, and prior dysplasia. Surveillance colonoscopy for CRC in patients with IBD should be tailored to individualized risk factors and requires careful monitoring every year to every five years. The current surveillance techniques are based on several guidelines. Chromoendoscopy with targeted biopsy is being recommended increasingly, and high-definition colonoscopy is gradually replacing standard-definition colonoscopy. However, it remains unclear whether chromoendoscopy, virtual chromoendoscopy, or white-light endoscopy has better efficiency when a high-definition scope is used. With the development of new endoscopic instruments and techniques, the paradigm of surveillance strategy has gradually changed. In this review, we discuss cutting-edge surveillance colonoscopy in patients with IBD including a review of literature.

S2133 Suck and Snare: A Technique for Rapid, Complete, and Safe Cold Snare Polypectomy of Sessile Polyps Greater Than One Centimeter

Introduction: Snare polypectomy of flat colon polyps may be challenging when boarders are indistinct or if the snare wire slides over the flat mucosal surface as the snare closes. Current guidelines suggest cold or hot snare polypectomy with or without submucosal injection for the removal of polyps between 1 and 1.9 centimeters (cm). Injection lift polypectomy and hot snare endoscopic mucosal resection of flat lesions can be time intensive and carries risks of perforation, post polypectomy syndrome, and bleeding. Cold snare technique has become increasingly utilized for Paris class 1s and 1sp polyps of any size. We propose an adaptation of the “suction polypectomy technique,” previously described for the removal of less than 1 cm sessile polyps, for use in cold snare polypectomy of sessile polyps greater than 1 cm. Case Description/Methods: Technique: Olympus high definition colonoscopes (CF-HQ190L/I) were used to identify sessile polyps between 10-15 mm (Table). The snare was passed though the instrument and pulled back slightly into the channel. Polyps were then suctioned using the tip of endoscope for 1-2 seconds. This technique was repeated over the surface of the entire lesion until the polyps puckered up, developing a more polypoid shape. The polyps were then immediately resected via cold snare polypectomy (Figure). All polyps were completely resected and there were no procedural complications. Discussion: This series shows that the “suction polypectomy” technique using a cold snare for polyps 1 cm or greater is feasible and safe with the benefits of not requiring the use of lifting agents, injection needles, or significant technical expertise. Future studies are required to determine the feasibility of suction polypectomy in lesions greater than 1.5 cm and the safety and efficacy of the technique in larger prospective cohorts.Figure 1.: Endoscopic images of the technique. Images labeled “A” show the polyp before suction. Images labeled “B” show the polyp after suction. Images labeled “C” show post-polypectomy. Table 1. - Characteristics of Polyps Removed Patient # Polyp Size Location Pathology Diagnosis En Bloc versus Piecemeal Complications (Immediate/Delayed Bleeding or Perforation) 1 10 mm Descending Colon Tubular Adenoma in Fragments En Bloc None 2 10 mm Ascending Colon Sessile Serrated Adenoma En Bloc None 3 12 mm Ascending Colon Sessile Serrated Adenoma En Bloc None 4 12 mm Ascending Colon Tubular Adenoma in Fragments En Bloc None 5 11 mm Transverse Colon Tubular Adenoma En Bloc None

Second-generation distal attachment cuff for adenoma detection in screening colonoscopy: a randomized multicenter study

Randomized studies have demonstrated that a distal attachment cap with rubber side arms, the Endocuff Vision (ECV; Olympus America, Center Valley, Pa, USA), increased colonoscopic adenoma detection rate (ADR) in various mixed patient collectives. This is the first study to evaluate its use in a primary colonoscopic screening program. Patients over age 55 years undergoing screening colonoscopy in 9 German private offices in Berlin and Hamburg were randomized to either the study group using ECV or the control group using high-definition colonoscopies (standard of care). The main outcome parameter was ADR, whereas secondary outcomes were detection rates of all adenomas per colonoscopy (APCs), of adenoma subgroups, and of hyperplastic polyps. Of 1416 patients (mean age, 61.1 years; 51.8% women), with a median of 41 examinations per examiner (n= 23; interquartile range, 12-81), 700 were examined with ECV and 716 without. Adjusting for the effects of the colonoscopies, ADR was 39.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.6%-46.3%) in the ECV group versus 32.2% (95% CI, 25.9%-38.6%) in the control group, which resulted in an increase of 7.2% (95% CI, 2.3%-12.2%; P= .004). The increase in ADR was mainly because of small polyps, with adjusted ADRs for adenomas<10mm of 33.3% (95% CI, 26.5%-40.2%) for study patients versus 24.0% (95% CI, 18.2%-29.8%) for control patients (P< .001). APC was also significantly increased (.57 ECV vs .51 control subjects, P= .045). A distal attachment cap with side arms significantly increased the ADR in patients undergoing primary colonoscopic screening. Because of the correlation of ADR and interval cancer, its use should be encouraged, especially in this setting. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03442738.).

Does i-scan improve adenoma detection rate compared to high-definition colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and study aims Recent studies evaluated the impact of i-scan in improving the adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared to high-definition (HD) colonoscopy. We aimed to systematically review and analyze the impact of this technique. Methods A thorough search of the following databases was undertaken: PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science. Full-text RCTs and cohort studies directly comparing i-scan and HD colonoscopy were deemed eligible for inclusion. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled and compared using random effects model and DerSimonian-Laird approach. For each outcome, relative risk (RR), 95 % confidence interval (CI), and P value was generated. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results A total of five studies with six arms were included in this analysis. A total of 2620 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.2 years and female proportion 44.8 %) completed the study and were included in our analysis. ADR was significantly higher with any i-scan (RR: 1.20, [CI: 1.06–1.34], P = 0.003) compared to HD colonoscopy. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that ADR was significantly higher using i-scan with surface and contrast enhancement only (RR: 1.25, [CI: 1.07–1.47], P = 0.004). Conclusions i-scan has the potential to increase ADR using the surface and contrast enhancement method. Future studies evaluating other outcomes of interest such as proximal adenomas and serrated lesions are warranted.

Clinicopathologic features of undetected dysplasia found in total colectomy or proctocolectomy specimens of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

It remains controversial as to whether targeted biopsies should completely replace random biopsies for dysplasia surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Several histologic patterns of nonconventional dysplasia have been described in IBD. This study aimed to investigate the rate and clinicopathologic features of dysplastic lesions found in total colectomy or proctocolectomy specimens that were undetected on prior colonoscopy. The study analyzed 207 consecutive IBD patients who underwent a total colectomy or proctocolectomy and had at least one high-definition colonoscopy prior to colectomy. Dysplasia found in the colectomy specimens was classified as undetected, only when there was no corresponding site of dysplasia detected on previous colonoscopic biopsies. Twenty-seven (13%) patients had 49 undetected dysplastic lesions found only at colectomy, while 22 (11%) had 31 previously detected dysplastic lesions only. The remaining 158 (76%) patients had no dysplasia. A greater proportion of the undetected (19%) or previously detected (23%) dysplasia group had concurrent primary sclerosing cholangitis compared with only 3% in the group without dysplasia (P < 0.001). The undetected dysplastic lesions were more likely to have nonconventional dysplastic features (76%), low-grade dysplasia (94%), and a flat/invisible gross appearance (73%) compared with the previously detected dysplastic lesions (13%, 68%, and 48%, respectively) (P < 0.05). Almost all patients with undetected dysplasia (93%) had a colonoscopy within 1 year of colectomy. The rate of undetected dysplasia is not insignificant (13%), suggesting that increased random biopsies may improve the rate of dysplasia detection, including nonconventional dysplasia.

Improving sessile serrated adenoma detection rates with high definition colonoscopy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUNDSessile serrated adenomas (SSAs) are important premalignant lesions that are difficult to detect during colonoscopy due to poor definition, concealment by mucous caps, and flat appearance. High definition (HD) colonoscopy may uniquely aid in the detection of these inconspicuous lesions compared to standard definition (SD) colonoscopes. In the absence of existing clinical guidelines to obligate the use of HD colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk patients, demonstrating the benefit of HD colonoscopy on SSA detection rate (SSADR) may help strengthen the evidence to recommend its use in all settings.AIMTo evaluate the benefit of HD colonoscopy compared to SD colonoscopy on SSADR in average-risk patients undergoing screening colonoscopy.METHODSData from screening colonoscopies for patients aged 50-76 years two years before and two years after the transition from SD colonoscopy to HD colonoscopy at our large, academic teaching center were collected. Patients with symptoms of colorectal disease, positive occult blood test, history of colon polyps, cancer, polyposis syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease or family history of colon cancer or polyps were excluded. Patients whose endoscopists did not perform colonoscopies both before and after scope definition change were also excluded. Differences in individual endoscopist SSADR, average SSADR, and overall SSADR with SD colonoscopy vs HD colonoscopy were also evaluated for significance.RESULTSA total of 3657 colonoscopies met eligibility criteria with 2012 colonoscopies from the SD colonoscopy period and 1645 colonoscopies from the HD colonoscopy period from a pool of 11 endoscopists. Statistically significant improvements of 2.30% in mean SSADR and 2.53% in overall SSADR were noted with HD colonoscopy (P = 0.00028 and P = 0.00849, respectively). On the individual level, three endoscopists experienced statistically significant benefit with HD colonoscopy (+5.74%, P = 0.0056; +4.50%, P = 0.0278; +4.84%, P = 0.03486).CONCLUSIONOur study suggests that HD colonoscopy statistically significantly improves sessile serrated adenoma detection rate in the screening of average risk patients during screening colonoscopy. By improving the detection and removal of these lesions, adoption of HD colonoscopy may reduce the significant premalignant burden of sessile serrated adenomas.

Colorectal Cancer Surveillance in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Chromoendoscopy or Non-Chromoendoscopy, That Is the Question.

Subjects affected by ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease with colonic localization have an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Surveillance colonoscopy is recommended by international guidelines as it can detect early-stage CRC. Based on previous evidence, in 2015 the Surveillance for Colorectal Endoscopic Neoplasia Detection and Management in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients International Consensus indicated dye chromoendoscopy (DCE) as the most effective technique for detecting dysplasia. However, advances in endoscopic technology such as high-definition colonoscopes and dye-less virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) may change future practice. In this review, we summarize the available evidence on CRC surveillance in IBD, focusing on the emerging role of high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) and VCE over the standard DCE, and the current role of random biopsies.

High-Definition Colonoscopy Compared With Cuff- and Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy: Results From a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Mucosal exposure devices including distal attachments such as the cuff and cap have shown variable results in improving adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with high-definition white light colonoscopy (HDWLE). We performed a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy comparing HDWLE to 2 different types of distal attachments: cuff (CF) (Endocuff Vision) or cap (CP) (Reveal). The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes included adenomas per colonoscopy, advanced adenoma and sessile serrated lesion detection rate, right-sided ADR, withdrawal time, and adverse events. Continuous variables were compared using Student's t test and categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test using statistical software Stata version16. A P value <.05 was considered significant. A total of 1203 subjects were randomized to either HDWLE (n= 384; mean 62 years of age; 81.3% males), CF (n= 379; mean 62.7 years of age; 79.9% males) or CP (n= 379; mean age 62.1 years of age; 80.5% males). No significant differences were found among 3 groups for ADR (57.3%, 59.1%, and 55.7%; P= .6), adenomas per colonoscopy (1.4 ± 1.9, 1.6 ± 2.4, and 1.4 ± 2; P= .3), advanced adenoma (7.6%, 9.2%, and 8.2%; P= .7), sessile serrated lesion (6.8%, 6.3%, and 5.5%; P= .8), or right ADR (48.2%, 49.3%, and 46.2%; P= .7). The number of polyps per colonoscopy were significantly higher in the CF group compared with HDWLE and CP group (2.7 ± 3.4, 2.3 ± 2.5, and 2.2 ± 2.3; P= .013). In a multivariable model, after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, withdrawal time, and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score, there was no impact of device type on the primary outcome of ADR (P= .77). In screening patients, CF resulted in more neoplasms per colonoscopy (CF: 1.7 ± 2.6, HDWLE: 1.3 ± 1.7, and CP: 1.2 ± 1.8; P= .047) with a shorter withdrawal time. Results from this multicenter randomized controlled trial do not show any significant benefit of using either distal attachment devices (CF or CP) over HDWLE, at least in high-detector endoscopists. The Endocuff may have an advantage in the screening population. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03952611).