Narrow-band imaging vs. high definition white light for optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps: a randomized multicenter trial

Background and study aim: The aim of the study was to compare the latest narrow-band imaging (NBI) device with high-definition white light (HDWL) endoscopy for accuracy of real-time optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps.

Patients and methods: We conducted a randomized, prospective, multicenter trial at three study sites in Germany. In the NBI arm, endoscopists used NBI for the prediction of polyp pathology on the basis of the NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic classification. In the HDWL arm, NBI was not used for optical classification of polyp histology. The primary outcome was accuracy of optical diagnoses (neoplastic vs. non-neoplastic) in small polyps measuring < 10 mm. Secondary end points included sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV).

Results: A total of 380 patients were randomized 1:1 to either the NBI or HDWL arm. A total of 421 polyps measuring < 10 mm were detected (55.8 % neoplastic, 44.2 % non-neoplastic). Accuracy, sensitivity, and NPV were 73.7 %, 82.4 %, and 75.5 %, respectively, in the NBI arm and 79.2 %, 79.8 %, and 73.4 %, respectively, in the HDWL arm (P = 0.225, P = 0.667, P = 0.765). More polyps were assessed with high confidence in the HDWL arm (82.6 %) than in the NBI arm (73.7 %; P = 0.038). The NPV of the prediction of neoplastic histology in diminutive polyps (≤ 5 mm) rated with high confidence was 90.3 % in the NBI arm. We detected significant differences between the participating study sites in the performance data of predictions.

Conclusion: The levels of accuracy for real-time prediction of polyp histology (< 10 mm) did not differ between NBI and HDWL for optical diagnosis. Variation in the performance of optical diagnosis was apparent between study centers.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02009774)

^* These authors contributed equally to the study.

• References

• 1 Stock C, Haug U, Brenner H. Population-based prevalence estimates of history of colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy: review and analysis of recent trends. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 366-381
• 2 Austin GL, Fennimore B, Ahnen DJ. Can colonoscopy remain cost-effective for colorectal cancer screening? The impact of practice patterns and the Will Rogers phenomenon on costs. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 296-301
• 3 Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK. A resect and discard strategy would improve cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 865-869
• 4 ASGE Technology Committee. Abu Dayyeh BK, Thosani N, Konda V et al. ASGE Technology Committee systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the ASGE PIVI thresholds for adopting real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 502.e1-502.e16
• 5 Rex DK, Kahi C, O’Brien M et al. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 419-422
• 6 Kamiński MF, Hassan C, Bisschops R et al. Advanced imaging for detection and differentiation of colorectal neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 435-449
• 7 Schachschal G, Mayr M, Treszl A et al. Endoscopic versus histological characterisation of polyps during screening colonoscopy. Gut 2014; 63: 458-465
• 8 Kang HY, Kim YS, Kang SJ et al. Comparison of narrow band imaging and Fujinon intelligent color enhancement in predicting small colorectal polyp histology. Dig Dis Sci 2015; 60: 2777-2784
• 9 Hewett DG, Kaltenbach T, Sano Y et al. Validation of a simple classification system for endoscopic diagnosis of small colorectal polyps using narrow-band imaging. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 599-607
• 10 German Guideline Program in Oncology (German Cancer Society, German Cancer Aid, AWMF). Evidenced-based guideline for colorectal cancer, long version 1.0, AWMF registration number: 021-007OL. Available from: http://leitlinienprogrammonkologie.de/Leitlinien.7.0.html Accessed 2015 Sep 10
• 11 Wallace MB, Crook JE, Coe S et al. Accuracy of in vivo colorectal polyp discrimination by using dual-focus high-definition narrow-band imaging colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 1072-1087
• 12 Ladabaum U, Fioritto A, Mitani A et al. Real-time optical biopsy of colon polyps with narrow band imaging in community practice does not yet meet key thresholds for clinical decisions. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 81-91
• 13 R Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from: http://www.R-project.org/ Accessed 2015 Sep 10
• 14 McGill SK, Evangelou E, Ioannidis JP et al. Narrow band imaging to differentiate neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal polyps in real time: a meta-analysis of diagnostic operating characteristics. Gut 2013; 62: 1704-1713
• 15 Repici A, Hassan C, Radaelli F et al. Accuracy of narrow-band imaging in predicting colonoscopy surveillance intervals and histology of distal diminutive polyps: results from a multicenter, prospective trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 106-114
• 16 Singh R, Jayanna M, Navadgi S et al. Narrow-band imaging with dual focus magnification in differentiating colorectal neoplasia. Dig Endosc 2013; 25 (Suppl. 02) 16-20
• 17 Rastogi A, Early DS, Gupta N et al. Randomized, controlled trial of standard-definition white-light, high-definition white-light, and narrow-band imaging colonoscopy for the detection of colon polyps and prediction of polyp histology. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 593-602
• 18 Bade K, MacPhail ME, Johnson CS et al. New colonoscope technology: impact on image capture and quality and on confidence and accuracy of endoscopy-based polyp discrimination. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 172-178
• 19 Paggi S, Rondonotti E, Amato A et al. Narrow-band imaging in the prediction of surveillance intervals after polypectomy in community practice. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 808-814