Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colore...Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.Methods This was a multicenter,single-blind,randomized,controlled trial with a non-inferiority design.Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination,screening,and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020.The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate(ADR),defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected.The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.Results Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled,data from 596 patients were analyzed.The ADRs were 34.5%in the SD-WL group,33.5%in the HD-WL group,and 37.5%in the HD-NBI group(P=0.72).The advanced neoplasm detection rates(ANDRs)in the three arms were 17.1%,15.5%,and 10.4%(P=0.17).No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR(ADR:34.5%vs.35.6%,P=0.79;ANDR:17.1%vs.13.0%,P=0.16,respectively).Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group(ADR:33.5%vs.37.7%,P=0.45;ANDR:15.5%vs.10.4%,P=0.18,respectively).In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses,neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL(HD-WL:OR 0.91,P=0.69;HD-NBI:OR 1.15,P=0.80).Conclusion HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients.It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL,but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future.Our study’s conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources,especially advanced imaging technologies.展开更多
AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized datab...AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 con- secutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light （n = 849） or HD＋ with i-Scan （n = 252） instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients＇ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy （screening, diagnos- tic or surveillance）, type of instrument used （standard white-light or HD＋ plus i-Scan）, name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or imme- diately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded. RESULTS： Eight hundred and forty-nine colonosco- pies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD＋ plus i-Scan video colonoscope, The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD＋ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences be- tween the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures （47.4%）. The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD＋ plus i-Scan mode （171/252 = 67.9%） than with the standard white-light technique （408/849 = 48.1%） （P 〈 0.0001）. HD＋ with i-Scan colonoscopies identified more lesions than standard white-light imag- ing （459/252 and 807/849, P 〈 0.0001）, in the right or left colon （mean ：1： SD, 1.62±1.36 vs 1.33±0.73, P 〈 0.003 and 1.55±0.98 vs 1.17±0.93, P = 0.033）, more lesions 〈 10 mm （P 〈 0.0001） or nonprotruding （P 〈 0.022）, and flat polyps （P = 0.04）. The cumulative mean number of lesions per procedure detected by the four endoscopists was significantly higher with HD＋ with i-Scan than with standard white-light imaging （1.82 ± 2.89 vs 0.95± 1.35, P 〈 0.0001）. CONCLUSION： HD imaging with i-Scan during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy significantly increased the detection of colonic mucosal lesions, particularly small and nonprotruding polyps.展开更多
基金supported by the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission(BMSTC,No.D171100002617001).
文摘Objective This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy(SD-WL),high-definition white-light endoscopy(HD-WL),and high-definition narrow-band imaging(HD-NBI)in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.Methods This was a multicenter,single-blind,randomized,controlled trial with a non-inferiority design.Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination,screening,and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020.The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate(ADR),defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected.The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.Results Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled,data from 596 patients were analyzed.The ADRs were 34.5%in the SD-WL group,33.5%in the HD-WL group,and 37.5%in the HD-NBI group(P=0.72).The advanced neoplasm detection rates(ANDRs)in the three arms were 17.1%,15.5%,and 10.4%(P=0.17).No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR(ADR:34.5%vs.35.6%,P=0.79;ANDR:17.1%vs.13.0%,P=0.16,respectively).Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group(ADR:33.5%vs.37.7%,P=0.45;ANDR:15.5%vs.10.4%,P=0.18,respectively).In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses,neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL(HD-WL:OR 0.91,P=0.69;HD-NBI:OR 1.15,P=0.80).Conclusion HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients.It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL,but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future.Our study’s conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources,especially advanced imaging technologies.
文摘AIM： To investigate if high-definition （HD） colonoscope with i-Scan gave a higher detection rate of mucosal le- sions vs standard white-light instruments. METHODS： Data were collected from the computer- ized database of the endoscopy unit of our tertiary referral center. We retrospectively analyzed 1101 con- secutive colonoscopies that were performed over 1 year with standard white-light （n = 849） or HD＋ with i-Scan （n = 252） instruments by four endoscopists, in an outpatient setting. Colonoscopy records included patients＇ main details and family history for colorectal cancer, indication for colonoscopy （screening, diagnos- tic or surveillance）, type of instrument used （standard white-light or HD＋ plus i-Scan）, name of endoscopist and bowel preparation. Records for each procedure included whether the cecum was reached or not and the reason for failure, complications during or imme- diately after the procedure, and number, size, location and characteristics of the lesions. Polyps or protruding lesions were defined as sessile or pedunculated, and nonprotruding lesions were defined according to Paris classification. For each lesion, histological diagnosis was recorded. RESULTS： Eight hundred and forty-nine colonosco- pies were carried with the standard white-light video colonoscope and 252 with the HD＋ plus i-Scan video colonoscope, The four endoscopists did 264, 300, 276 and 261 procedures, respectively; 21.6%, 24.0%, 21.7% and 24.1% of them with the HD＋ plus i-Scan technique. There were no significant differences be- tween the four endoscopists in either the number of procedures done or the proportions of each imaging technique used. Both techniques detected one or more mucosal lesions in 522/1101 procedures （47.4%）. The overall number of lesions recognized was 1266; 645 in the right colon and 621 in the left. A significantly higher number of colonoscopies recognized lesions in the HD＋ plus i-Scan mode （171/252 = 67.9%） than with the standard white-light technique （408/849 = 48.1%） （P 〈 0.0001）. HD＋ with i-Scan colonoscopies identified more lesions than standard white-light imag- ing （459/252 and 807/849, P 〈 0.0001）, in the right or left colon （mean ：1： SD, 1.62±1.36 vs 1.33±0.73, P 〈 0.003 and 1.55±0.98 vs 1.17±0.93, P = 0.033）, more lesions 〈 10 mm （P 〈 0.0001） or nonprotruding （P 〈 0.022）, and flat polyps （P = 0.04）. The cumulative mean number of lesions per procedure detected by the four endoscopists was significantly higher with HD＋ with i-Scan than with standard white-light imaging （1.82 ± 2.89 vs 0.95± 1.35, P 〈 0.0001）. CONCLUSION： HD imaging with i-Scan during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy significantly increased the detection of colonic mucosal lesions, particularly small and nonprotruding polyps.
