• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy International Open >Comparison of colon adenoma detection rates using cap-assisted and Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Comparison of colon adenoma detection rates using cap-assisted and Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

机译：使用帽辅助和内圆锥辅助结肠镜检查结肠腺瘤检测率的比较：随机对照试验

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objectives and study aim?Colonoscopy prevents colorectal cancer by removing adenomatous polyps, but missed adenomas lead to interval cancers. Different devices have been used to increase adenoma detection rates (ADR). Two such devices of interest are the transparent cap (Olympus) and Endocuff (ARC Medical). Our study aimed to compare differences in ADR between Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC), cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) and standard colonoscopy (SC). Patients and methods?A sample size of 126 subjects was calculated to determine an effect size of 30?%. Patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy between March 2016 and January 2017 were randomized to SC, CAC or EAC groups. Three experienced endoscopists performed all colonoscopies. Patient demographics, procedure indication, Boston Bowel Prep Score (BBPS), withdrawal time, polyp size, location, histopathology, were analyzed. Results?There was no difference in ADR (52?%, 40?% and 54?%) in the SC, CAC and EAC groups respectively (P?=?0.4). Similar findings were also observed for proximal ADR (45?%, 35?%, and 50?%, P?=?0.4) and SSA detection rate (16?%, 14?%, and 23?%, P?=?0.5). EAC detected higher mean ADR per colonoscopy compared to CAC (1.70 vs 0.76, P?=?0.01). However, there was no significant difference in mean ADR per positive colonoscopy (2.08, 1.63, and 2.59, P?=?0.21). Conclusion?In a randomized controlled trial comparing AC to CAC and SC, neither device conferred additional benefits in ADR among high detectors. When comparing each device, EAC may be better than CAC at detecting more total adenomas.
机译：目的和研究目的？结肠镜检查通过去除腺瘤性息肉来防止结肠直肠癌，但错过了腺瘤导致间隔癌症。不同的设备已被用于增加腺瘤检测率（ADR）。两个感兴趣的装置是透明帽（Olympus）和Endocuff（Arc Medical）。我们的研究旨在比较内圆形辅助结肠镜检查（EAC），CAP辅助结肠镜检查（CAC）和标准结肠镜检查（SC）之间的ADR的差异。患者和方法？计算出126个受试者的样品尺寸以确定效果大小为30μm。 2016年3月至2017年1月在2016年3月至2017年3月间进行筛查或监测结肠镜的患者随机分为SC，CAC或EAC组。三位经验的内窥镜师进行了所有的结肠镜检查。分析了患者人口统计学，程序指示，波士顿肠道预制评分（Bbps），戒断时间，息肉尺寸，位置，组织病理学。结果：SC，CAC和EAC组中的ADR（52〜％，40℃和54倍）没有差异（P？= 0.4）。还观察到类似的发现（45〜％，35μl和50μl，p≤0.4）和SSA检测率（16μm，14μl和23μm，p？=？ 0.5）。与CAC相比，EAC检测到每个结肠镜检查的平均值更高（1.70 Vs 0.76，p？= 0.01）。然而，每种阳性结肠镜检查（2.08,1.63和2.59，P？= 0.21）没有显着差异。结论？在随机对照试验中比较AC至CAC和SC，既没有设备在高探测器中都赋予ADR的额外效益。当比较每个器件时，在检测更多总腺瘤时，EAC可能比CAC更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号