Effect of 3-Dimensional Imaging Device on Polyp and Adenoma Detection During Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

被引:3
|
作者
Sun, Xiujing [1 ]
Zhang, Qian [1 ]
Wu, Shanshan [1 ]
Xu, Changqin [2 ]
Zhang, Yang [1 ]
Hao, Xiaowen [1 ]
Meng, Ying [1 ]
Jiao, Yue [1 ]
Li, Hongmei [1 ]
Zhu, Siying [1 ]
Zhou, Yanhua [1 ]
Liu, Kuiliang [1 ]
Xu, Hongwei [2 ]
Zhu, Shengtao [1 ]
Zhang, Shutian [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Key Lab Precancerous Lesion Digest Dis, Beijing Friendship Hosp,Dept Gastroenterol, Natl Clin Res Ctr Digest Dis,Beijing Digest Dis C, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Shandong First Med Univ, Dept Gastroenterol, Shandong Prov Hosp, Jinan, Shandong, Peoples R China
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY | 2023年 / 118卷 / 10期
关键词
three-dimensional imaging; adenoma; polyp; detection rate; colonoscopy;
D O I
10.14309/ajg.0000000000002396
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
INTRODUCTION:To evaluate the effect of 3-dimensional (3D) imaging device on polyp and adenoma detection during colonoscopy. METHODS:In a single-blind, randomized controlled trial, participants aged 18-70 years who underwent diagnostic or screening colonoscopy were consecutively enrolled between August 2019 and May 2022. Each participant was randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either 2-dimensional (2D-3D) colonoscopy or 3D-2D colonoscopy through computer-generated random numbers. Primary outcome included polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of individuals with at least 1 polyp or adenoma detected during colonoscopy. The primary analysis was intention-to-treat. RESULTS:Of 1,196 participants recruited, 571 in 2D-3D group and 583 in 3D-2D group were finally included after excluding those who met the exclusion criteria. The PDR between 2D and 3D groups was separately 39.6% and 40.5% during phase 1 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.22, P = 0.801), whereas PDR was significantly higher in 3D group (27.7%) than that of 2D group (19.9%) during phase 2, with a 1.54-fold increase (1.17-2.02, P = 0.002). Similarly, the ADR during phase 1 between 2D (24.7%) and 3D (23.8%) groups was not significant (OR = 1.05, 0.80-1.37, P = 0.788), while ADR was significantly higher in 3D group (13.8%) than that of 2D group (9.9%) during phase 2, with a 1.45-fold increase (1.01-2.08, P = 0.041). Further subgroup analysis confirmed significantly higher PDR and ADR of 3D group during phase 2, particularly in midlevel and junior endoscopists. DISCUSSION:The 3D imaging device could improve overall PDR and ADR during colonoscopy, particularly in midlevel and junior endoscopists. Trial number: ChiCTR1900025000.
引用
收藏
页码:1812 / 1820
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] ENDOCUFF-ASSISTED COLONOSCOPY: A USEFUL ACCESSORY TO IMPROVE ADENOMA DETECTION RATE IN SCREENING COLONOSCOPY? A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
    Alicante, S.
    De Grazia, F.
    Manfredi, G.
    Lupinacci, G.
    Londoni, C.
    Menozzi, F.
    Brambilla, G.
    Vattiato, C.
    Giunta, M.
    Buscarini, E.
    DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE, 2017, 49 : E80 - E81
  • [42] Trainee Participation during Colonoscopy Adversely Affects Polyp and Adenoma Detection Rates
    Nishizawa, Toshihiro
    Suzuki, Hidekazu
    Takahashi, Masahiko
    Kaneko, Hiroshi
    Fujiyama, Yoichi
    Komatsu, Hidetsugu
    Nagumo, Hironobu
    Tanaka, Shin
    Hibi, Toshifumi
    DIGESTION, 2011, 84 (03) : 245 - 246
  • [43] Nationally Automated Colonoscopy Performance Feedback Increases Polyp Detection: The NED APRIQOT Randomized Controlled Trial
    Catlow, Jamie
    Sharp, Linda
    Wagnild, Janelle
    Lu, Liya
    Bhardwaj-Gosling, Rashmi
    Ogundimu, Emmanuel
    Kasim, Adetayo
    Brookes, Matthew
    Lee, Thomas
    Mccarthy, Stephen
    Gray, Joanne
    Sniehotta, Falko
    Valori, Roland
    Westwood, Claire
    McNally, Richard
    Ruwende, Josephine
    Sinclair, Simon
    Deane, Jill
    Rutter, Matt
    CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2024, 22 (09) : 1926 - 1936
  • [44] Novel Endocuff-assisted Colonoscopy Significantly Increases the Polyp Detection Rate A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Biecker, Erwin
    Floer, Martin
    Heinecke, Achim
    Stroebel, Philipp
    Boehme, Rita
    Schepke, Michael
    Meister, Tobias
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 49 (05) : 413 - 418
  • [45] The impact of three-dimensional imaging on polyp detection during colonoscopy: a proof of concept study
    Sakata, Shinichiro
    Grove, Philip M.
    Stevenson, Andrew R. L.
    Hewett, David G.
    GUT, 2016, 65 (05) : 730 - 731
  • [46] Effect of magnetic endoscope imaging on patient tolerance and sedation requirements during colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial
    Shah, SG
    Brooker, JC
    Thapar, C
    Suzuki, N
    Williams, CB
    Saunders, BP
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2002, 55 (07) : 832 - 837
  • [47] Effect of simply recording colonoscopy withdrawal time on polyp and adenoma detection rates
    Taber, Andrew
    Romagnuolo, Joseph
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2010, 71 (04) : 782 - 786
  • [48] The Utility of Timed Segment Withdrawal During Screening Colonoscopy for Increasing Adenoma Detection Rate: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
    Jia, Yi
    Zuckerman, Marc J.
    Michael, Majd
    Martinez, Jose
    Mendoza-Ladd, Antonio
    Garcia, Cesar
    Sunny, Joseph
    Delgado, Veronica Caro
    Hernandez, Berenice
    Dodoo, Christopher
    Dwivedi, Alok
    Othman, Mohamed
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2016, 111 : S105 - S105
  • [49] Comparison of adenoma detection by polypectomy during both insertion and withdrawal versus only withdrawal of colonoscopy: a randomized, controlled multicenter trial
    Ji, J. -S.
    Lee, S. -W.
    Lee, J. R.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2016, 27 : 69 - 69
  • [50] Effect of video monitor size on polyp detection: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial
    Jovani, Manol
    Campbell, Emily J.
    Hur, Chin
    Joshi, Amit D.
    Nishioka, Norman S.
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2019, 90 (02) : 254 - +