Abstract
Worldwide, colorectal cancer is the third commonest cancer. Over 90% follow an adenoma-to-cancer
sequence over many years. Colonoscopy is the gold standard method for cancer screening
and early adenoma detection. However, considerable variation exists between endoscopists’
detection rates. This review considers the effects of different endoscopic techniques
on adenoma detection. Two areas of technological interest were considered: (1) optical
technologies and (2) mechanical technologies. Optical solutions, including FICE, NBI,
i-SCAN and high definition colonoscopy showed mixed results. In contrast, mechanical
advances, such as cap-assisted colonoscopy, FUSE, EndoCuff and G-EYE™, showed promise,
with reported detections rates of up to 69%. However, before definitive recommendations
can be made for their incorporation into daily practice, further studies and comparison
trials are required.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Digestive and Liver DiseaseAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Cancer statistics, 2015.CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2015; 65: 5-29
- Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology.Gastroenterology. 2008; 134: 1570-1595
- Time trends in colon cancer incidence and distribution and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy utilization in Manitoba.American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2008; 103: 1249-1256
- Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.Gastroenterology. 2012; 143: 844-857
- Effect of colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: an instrumental variable analysis.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2012; 76 (e1.): 355-364
- Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths.New England Journal of Medicine. 2012; 366: 687-696
- Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies.Gastroenterology. 1997; 112: 24-28
- Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review.American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2006; 101: 343-350
- Risk of developing proximal versus distal colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy: a population-based study.Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2008; 6 (quiz 1064): 1117-1121
- Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary polyp prevention trial.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2005; 61: 385-391
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer.New England Journal of Medicine. 2010; 362: 1795-1803
- Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death.New England Journal of Medicine. 2014; 370: 1298-1306
- Assessment of quality in screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer.Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology. 2011; 4: 277-281
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2015; 81: 31-53
- Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy.New England Journal of Medicine. 2006; 355: 2533-2541
- A randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of prescribed patient position changes during colonoscope withdrawal on adenoma detection.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014; 80 (e1.): 277-283
- MO1007 cap-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: is the cap beneficial? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2016; 83: AB424-AB425
- Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy according to lesion location and endoscopist training level.World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2015; 21: 6261-6270
- Cap-assisted colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis.International Journal of Colorectal Disease. 2013; 28: 279-281
- SA1224 CAP assisted colonoscopy enhances quality based competency in colonoscopy among trainees: a randomized controlled trial.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2016; 83: AB260-AB261
- Cap-fitted colonoscopy: a randomized, tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010; 72: 775-781
- Cap-assisted colonoscopy and detection of adenomatous polyps (CAP) study: a randomized trial.Endoscopy. 2015; 47: 891-897
- Adenoma detection with cap-assisted colonoscopy versus regular colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial.Gut. 2012; 61: 1426-1434
- The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in polyp detection and cecal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2012; 107: 1165-1173
- Cap assisted colonoscopy for the detection of serrated polyps: a post-hoc analysis.BMC Gastroenterology. 2015; 15: 11
- Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a new accessory to improve adenoma detection rate? Technical aspects and first clinical experiences.Endoscopy. 2014; 46: 610-614
- Endocuff assisted colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rates: a multi-center study.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014; 79: AB550
- Higher adenoma detection rates with endocuff-assisted colonoscopy—a randomized controlled multicenter trial.PLoS One. 2014; 9: e114267
- Novel endocuff-assisted colonoscopy significantly increases the polyp detection rate: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology. 2015; 49: 413-418
- Cap cuff-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized back-to-back study.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2017; (in press)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.027
- Adenoma detection with endocuff colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.Gut. 2017; 66: 438-445
- OP373 the first randomised controllled trial of Endocuff Vision® assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for polyp detection in bowel cancer screening patients (E-CAP study).United European Gastroenterology Journal. 2016; 4: A144-A145
- The ADENOMA study. Accuracy of detection using endocuff vision optimization of mucosal abnormalities: study protocol for randomized controlled trial.Endoscopy International Open. 2016; 4: E205-E2012
- Multicenter, randomized, tandem evaluation of EndoRings colonoscopy-results of the CLEVER study.Endoscopy. 2015; 47: 1151-1158
- A novel balloon colonoscope detects significantly more simulated polyps than a standard colonoscope in a colon model.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014; 80: 1135-1140
- Safety and efficacy of a novel balloon colonoscope: a prospective cohort study.Endoscopy. 2014; 46: 883-887
- Comparison of adenoma detection and miss rates between a novel balloon colonoscope and standard colonoscopy: a randomized tandem study.Endoscopy. 2015; 47: 238-244
- G-EYE™ colonoscopy significantly improves adenoma detection rates: initial results of a multicentre prospective cohort study.The American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2014; 109: s610
- 1006 comparison of adenoma detection rate by G-EYEhigh definition colonoscopy vs. standard high definition colonoscopy—a prospective randomised mulitcenter trial.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2016; 83: AB192
- High definition colonoscopy vs. standard video endoscopy for the detection of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis.Endoscopy. 2011; 43: 499-505
- A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique.Alimentary Pharmacology Therapeutics. 2008; 28: 768-776
- Impact of wide-angle, high-definition endoscopy in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial.Gastroenterology. 2008; 135: 1062-1068
- High-definition colonoscopy detects colorectal polyps at a higher rate than standard white-light colonoscopy.Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2010; 8: 364-370
- High-definition colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate.Surg. Endoscopy Other Intervent. Tech. 2016; : 1-7https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4986-7
- Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum.Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 4: CD006439
- SCENIC international consensus statement on surveillance and management of dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2015; 81 (e26.): 489-501
- Meta-analysis of narrow-band imaging versus conventional colonoscopy for adenoma detection.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2012; 75: 604-611
- Narrow-band versus white-light high definition television endoscopic imaging for screening colonoscopy: a prospective randomized trial.Gastroenterology. 2009; 136: 410-416
- Comparison of the yield and miss rate of narrow band imaging and white light endoscopy in patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy: a meta-analysis.American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2012; 107: 363-370
- A randomized, controlled trial of narrow-band imaging vs high-definition white light for adenoma detection in patients at high risk of adenomas.Colorectal Disease. 2012; 14: e771-e778
- Comparative study of conventional colonoscopy and pan-colonic narrow-band imaging system in the detection of neoplastic colonic polyps: a randomized, controlled trial.Journal of Gastroenterology. 2008; 43: 45-50
- 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.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2011; 74: 593-602
- Narrow-band imaging does not improve detection of colorectal polyps when compared to conventional colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial and meta-analysis of published studies.BMC Gastroenterology. 2011; 11: 100
- Computed virtual chromoendoscopy versus standard colonoscopy with targeted indigocarmine chromoscopy: a randomised multicentre trial.Gut. 2009; 58: 73-78
- Efficacy of computed virtual chromoendoscopy on colorectal cancer screening: a prospective, randomized, back-to-back trial of Fuji intelligent color enhancement versus conventional colonoscopy to compare adenoma miss rates.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010; 72: 136-142
- Prospective, randomized, back-to-back trial evaluating the usefulness of i-SCAN in screening colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2012; 75 (e2.): 1011-1021
- High definition colonoscopy combined with i-SCAN imaging technology is superior in the detection of adenomas and advanced lesions compared to high definition colonoscopy alone.Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endosc. 2015; (Article ID 167406): 5
- A prospective cohort study evaluating a novel colonoscopy platform featuring full-spectrum endoscopy.Endoscopy. 2013; 45: 697-702
- Standard forward-viewing colonoscopy versus full-spectrum endoscopy: an international, multicentre, randomised, tandem colonoscopy trial.Lancet Oncology. 2014; 15: 353-360
- Lower adenoma miss rate with FUSE vs. conventional colonoscopy with proximal retroflexion: a randomized back-to-back trial.Endoscopy. 2017; ([Epub ahead of print])https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-124415
- Full-spectrum (FUSE) versus standard forward-viewing colonoscopy in an organised colorectal cancer screening programme.Gut. 2016; (Published Online First August 2016)https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-311906
- A retrograde-viewing device improves detection of adenomas in the colon: a prospective efficacy evaluation (with videos).Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010; 71: 551-556
- Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2011; 73: 480-489
- Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the third eye retroscope study group.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010; 71: 542-550
- Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer.Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 150: 1-8
- Protection from right- and left-sided colorectal neoplasms after colonoscopy: population-based study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2010; 102: 89-95
- The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2011; 73: 1207-1214
- Right-sided adenoma detection with retroflexion versus forward-view colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2015; 81: 608-613
- Quality in screening colonoscopy: position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE).Endoscopy. 2012; 44: 957-968
Article info
Publication history
Published online: April 09, 2017
Accepted:
March 27,
2017
Received in revised form:
March 6,
2017
Received:
November 3,
2016
Identification
Copyright
© 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
