Background The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the most important marker of colonoscopy quality. Devices to improve adenoma detection have been developed, such as the Endocuff and transparent cap. The aim of the current study was to examine whether there was a difference in ADR between Endocuff-assisted (EAC) and cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC).
Methods A randomized prospective trial was conducted. Eligible patients included adults ≥ 18 years referred because of symptoms, surveillance, or colonoscopies as part of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). The primary outcome measure was ADR. Secondary outcomes included mean number of adenomas, mean number of polyps, polyp detection rate, cecal intubation rate, and time to cecal intubation. Procedural measures, device removal rate, and adverse events were also recorded.
Results A total of 711 patients (51.1 % men; median age 63 years) were included, of whom 357 patients were randomized to EAC and 354 patients to CAC. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the ADR was similar in both groups: EAC 50.4 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 45.1 – 55.7) vs. CAC 50.6 % (95 %CI 45.2 – 55.9). Similar results were obtained in the per-protocol analysis: EAC 51.6 % (95 %CI 46.2 – 57) vs. CAC 51.4 % (95 %CI 46 – 56.8). There were no differences between the two devices in ADR according to the mean number of adenomas and polyps per procedure, polyp detection rate, cecal intubation rate, and time to cecal intubation. Device removal rate and adverse events were also similar.
Conclusion In this randomized study, no differences in ADR were found between Endocuff- and cap-assisted colonoscopy.
References
1
Ferlay J,
Shin H-R,
Bray F.
et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 2893-2917
3
Heresbach D,
Barrioz T,
Lapalus MG.
et al. Miss rate for neoplastic polyps: a prospective multicenter study of back-to-back video colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 284-290
4
Aranda Hernández J,
Aguilar-Shea AL,
Walsh J.
Cáncer colorrectal de intervalo y criterios de calidad de colonoscopia: a propósito de un caso. Semergen 2013; 39: 52-55
7
Kaminski MF,
Thomas-Gibson S,
Bugajski M.
et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 378-397
8
Floer M,
Biecker E,
Fitzlaff R.
et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled multicenter trial. PLoS One 2014; 9: e114267
9
Van Doorn SC,
Van Der Vlugt M,
Depla AC.
et al. Adenoma detection with Endocuff colonoscopy vs conventional colonoscopy: a multicenter randomised controlled trial. Gut 2017; 66: 438-445
11
Biecker E,
Floer M,
Heinecke A.
et al. Novel endocuff-assisted colonoscopy significantly increases the polyp detection rate: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Gastroenterol 2015; 49: 413-418
14
Rastogi A,
Bansal A,
Rao DS.
et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with cap-assisted colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut 2012; 61: 402-408
15
Park SM,
Lee SH,
Shin KY.
et al. The cap-assisted technique enhances colonoscopy training: prospective randomized study of six trainees. Surg Endosc 2012; 26: 2939-2943
16
Frieling T,
Neuhaus F,
Kuhlbusch-Zicklam R.
et al. Prospective and randomised study to evaluate the clinical impact of cap assisted colonoscopy (CAC). Z Gastroenterol 2013; 51: 1383-1388
17
Morgan J,
Thomas K,
Lee-Robichaud H.
et al. Transparent cap colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for investigation of gastrointestinal tract conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 2: CD008211
18
Lee YT,
Lai LH,
Hui AJ.
et al. Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 41-46
19
de Wijkerslooth TR,
Stoop EM,
Bossuyt PM.
et al. Adenoma detection with cap-assisted colonoscopy versus regular colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut 2012; 61: 1426-1434
20
De Palma GD,
Giglio MC,
Bruzzese D.
et al. Cap cuff-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized back-to-back study. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 232-240
21
Rastogi A,
Bansal A,
Rao DS.
et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with cap-assisted colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut 2012; 61: 402-408
22
Imaeda H,
Yamaoka M,
Ohgo H.
et al. A randomized control trial of adenoma detection rate in endocuff-assisted colonoscopy versus transparent hood-assisted colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: AB56
23
Boroff ES,
Disbrow M,
Crowell MD.
et al. Adenoma and polyp detection rates in colonoscopy according to indication. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2017; 2017: 7207595
24
Wang HS,
Pisegna J,
Modi R.
et al. Adenoma detection rate is necessary but insufficient for distinguishing high versus low endoscopist performance. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 71-78
25
Lee TJW,
Rutter MD,
Blanks RG.
et al. Colonoscopy quality measures: experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Gut 2012; 61: 1050-1057
26
Wada Y,
Fukuda M,
Ohtsuka K.
et al. Efficacy of Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy in the detection of colorrectal polyps. Endosc Int Open 2018; 06: E425-E431
27
Facciorusso A,
del Prete V,
Vincenzo R.
et al. Comparative efficacy of colonoscope distal attachment devices in increasing rates of adenoma detection: a network meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1209-1219
28
Pohl H,
Bensen SP,
Toor A.
et al. Cap-assisted colonoscopy and detection of Adenomatous Polyps (CAP) study: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 891-897
