Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026
Effect of Combination of a Mucosal Exposure Device and Computer-Aided Detection in Diagnostic, Screening, and Surveillance Colonoscopy: An International, Multicenter Study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Maas Michiel H J, van Riswijk Milou L M, Rath Timo, Cesaro Paola, Salvi Daniele, Siersema Peter D, DISCOVERY III study group
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Mucosal exposure devices (MEDs) and computer-aided detection (CADe) systems may both improve adenoma detection through distinct mechanisms: expanding mucosal visualization and highlighting lesions, respectively. This study investigated the efficacy of combining CADe-assisted colonoscopy with a MED compared with CADe-assisted colonoscopy alone.
METHODS: This international, multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm study (NTC05220345) was conducted at 3 centers that also participated in the previous DISCOVERY II randomized controlled trial, comparing CADe-assisted with conventional colonoscopy. Eligible participants were patients referred for diagnostic, nonfecal immunochemical test screening, or surveillance colonoscopy and underwent CADe-assisted colonoscopy (DISCOVERY, PENTAX Medical) with a MED using an integrated inflatable balloon (G-EYE, SMART Medical Systems). The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR); secondary outcomes included sessile serrated lesion detection rate and withdrawal time without interventions. Outcomes were compared with historical controls of the CADe-arm of the DISCOVERY II study.
RESULTS: Of 196 enrolled participants, 182 were included in the final analysis and compared with 250 participants from the historical CADe-arm. ADR was 47.3% in the CADe + MED-group vs 38.4% in the CADe-group ( P = .066; absolute difference: 8.9%, 95% confidence interval: 0.6-18.3). Mixed-effects logistic regression model adjusting for clustering and confounders calculated an odds ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval: 0.74-1.81). Median withdrawal time was slightly longer with CADe + MED compared with CADe-only (10.0 vs 9.2 minutes, P = 0.004), whereas sessile serrated lesion detection rate was not significantly different (12.6% vs 18.4%, P = 0.11).
DISCUSSION: In this study using historical controls, CADe-assisted colonoscopy combined with a MED did not significantly increase ADR compared with CADe alone, suggesting limited synergistic benefit.
METHODS: This international, multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm study (NTC05220345) was conducted at 3 centers that also participated in the previous DISCOVERY II randomized controlled trial, comparing CADe-assisted with conventional colonoscopy. Eligible participants were patients referred for diagnostic, nonfecal immunochemical test screening, or surveillance colonoscopy and underwent CADe-assisted colonoscopy (DISCOVERY, PENTAX Medical) with a MED using an integrated inflatable balloon (G-EYE, SMART Medical Systems). The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR); secondary outcomes included sessile serrated lesion detection rate and withdrawal time without interventions. Outcomes were compared with historical controls of the CADe-arm of the DISCOVERY II study.
RESULTS: Of 196 enrolled participants, 182 were included in the final analysis and compared with 250 participants from the historical CADe-arm. ADR was 47.3% in the CADe + MED-group vs 38.4% in the CADe-group ( P = .066; absolute difference: 8.9%, 95% confidence interval: 0.6-18.3). Mixed-effects logistic regression model adjusting for clustering and confounders calculated an odds ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval: 0.74-1.81). Median withdrawal time was slightly longer with CADe + MED compared with CADe-only (10.0 vs 9.2 minutes, P = 0.004), whereas sessile serrated lesion detection rate was not significantly different (12.6% vs 18.4%, P = 0.11).
DISCUSSION: In this study using historical controls, CADe-assisted colonoscopy combined with a MED did not significantly increase ADR compared with CADe alone, suggesting limited synergistic benefit.