Digestion · 2025
Endocuff Vision-Assisted Colonoscopy Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection in a Shorter Withdrawal Time Compared with Standard Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное 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.
Quach Duc Trong, Nguyen Thu Anh, Luu Mai Ngoc, Vo Uyen Pham-Phuong, Tran Vy Ly-Thao, Tran Truc Le-Thanh, Nguyen Tai Duy, Le Nhan Quang, Hiyama Toru, Tanaka Shinji
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Although several studies in Western countries have shown that Endocuff Vision-assisted colonoscopy (EC) can improve the colorectal adenoma detection rate (ADR), such evidence in Asia is still scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of EC in detecting colorectal adenomas in Vietnamese patients.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial conducted at a tertiary hospital in Vietnam. Subjects aged ≥18 years referred for colonoscopy for symptomatic investigation or screening were randomly assigned to the EC group or standard colonoscopy (SC) group. The primary outcome was the ADR. The secondary outcomes included the mean number of adenomas per procedure (MAP), cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time.
RESULTS: There were 476 participants (241 in the EC group, 235 in the SC group) with a median age of 52 (interquartile range [IR]: 46, 58) years. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding age, sex, smoking status, family history of colorectal cancer, or indications for colonoscopy. Compared with the SC group, the EC group had significantly higher ADRs (35.7% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.002) and MAPs (0.68 vs. 0.39, p = 0.004). The intubation durations were comparable between the two groups. The withdrawal time in the EC group was shorter than that in the SC group (median [seconds]: 266 [IR: 224, 314] vs. 360 [IR: 310, 390], p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SC, EC significantly increased both the ADR and MAP in a shorter inspection time and could be a better choice for colonoscopy screening.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial conducted at a tertiary hospital in Vietnam. Subjects aged ≥18 years referred for colonoscopy for symptomatic investigation or screening were randomly assigned to the EC group or standard colonoscopy (SC) group. The primary outcome was the ADR. The secondary outcomes included the mean number of adenomas per procedure (MAP), cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time.
RESULTS: There were 476 participants (241 in the EC group, 235 in the SC group) with a median age of 52 (interquartile range [IR]: 46, 58) years. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding age, sex, smoking status, family history of colorectal cancer, or indications for colonoscopy. Compared with the SC group, the EC group had significantly higher ADRs (35.7% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.002) and MAPs (0.68 vs. 0.39, p = 0.004). The intubation durations were comparable between the two groups. The withdrawal time in the EC group was shorter than that in the SC group (median [seconds]: 266 [IR: 224, 314] vs. 360 [IR: 310, 390], p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SC, EC significantly increased both the ADR and MAP in a shorter inspection time and could be a better choice for colonoscopy screening.