Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2026
Virtual chromoendoscopy with linked color imaging versus dye-chromoendoscopy in the surveillance of patients with long-standing colonic inflammatory bowel disease.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gabbiadini Roberto, Franchellucci Gianluca, Minini Francesco, Dal Buono Arianna, Privitera Giuseppe, Spadaccini Marco, Migliorisi Giulia, Petronio Lorenzo, Farinola Valeria, Di Martino Antonio, Bezzio Cristina, Hassan Cesare, Repici Alessandro, Armuzzi Alessandro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Surveillance colonoscopy programmes in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are associated with reduced colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. This study aims to compare the performance of virtual chromoendoscopy (VCE) using linked color imaging (LCI) and dye-chromoendoscopy (DCE) with methylene blue for the detection of colonic neoplastic lesions during surveillance colonoscopy in patients with IBD.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with colonic IBD undergoing CRC surveillance colonoscopy between June 2018 and December 2024. The primary outcome was the total neoplastic lesions detected in each group. The secondary outcome was the neoplastic lesions detection rate. Propensity-score matching and multivariable Poisson and logistic regression were used to adjust for baseline differences and identify independent predictors.
RESULTS: 311 patients were included (112 DCE, 199 LCI). The mean number of neoplastic lesions identified per colonoscopy was 0.116 with DCE and 0.085 with LCI (P = .472). Similarly, the neoplasia detection rate was comparable between techniques (8.03% for DCE vs 7.53% for LCI; odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-2.54, P = .874). After 1:1 propensity score matching, the chromoendoscopy modality (DCE vs LCI) was not associated with the total number of neoplastic lesions (IRR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.34-1.78; P = .543) and with the neoplastic lesions detection rate (OR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.21-1.65; P = .310).
CONCLUSIONS: LCI-based VCE provides a neoplastic yield comparable to traditional DCE in patients with long-standing colonic IBD undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. As with other VCE modalities, LCI may be adopted as an alternative to DCE for dysplasia surveillance in IBD.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with colonic IBD undergoing CRC surveillance colonoscopy between June 2018 and December 2024. The primary outcome was the total neoplastic lesions detected in each group. The secondary outcome was the neoplastic lesions detection rate. Propensity-score matching and multivariable Poisson and logistic regression were used to adjust for baseline differences and identify independent predictors.
RESULTS: 311 patients were included (112 DCE, 199 LCI). The mean number of neoplastic lesions identified per colonoscopy was 0.116 with DCE and 0.085 with LCI (P = .472). Similarly, the neoplasia detection rate was comparable between techniques (8.03% for DCE vs 7.53% for LCI; odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-2.54, P = .874). After 1:1 propensity score matching, the chromoendoscopy modality (DCE vs LCI) was not associated with the total number of neoplastic lesions (IRR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.34-1.78; P = .543) and with the neoplastic lesions detection rate (OR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.21-1.65; P = .310).
CONCLUSIONS: LCI-based VCE provides a neoplastic yield comparable to traditional DCE in patients with long-standing colonic IBD undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. As with other VCE modalities, LCI may be adopted as an alternative to DCE for dysplasia surveillance in IBD.