PubMed:33349200 JSONTXT

{"target":"https://pubannotation.org/docs/sourcedb/PubMed/sourceid/33349200","sourcedb":"PubMed","sourceid":"33349200","source_url":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33349200","text":"Standard versus Endocuff versus cap-assisted colonoscopy for adenoma detection: A randomised controlled clinical trial.\nBACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) in colon cancer screening is most important for cancer prophylaxis. This work is the first three-armed randomised controlled clinical trial aimed at comparing a head-to-head setting standard colonoscopy (SC) with Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EC) and cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) for improvement of ADR.\nMETHODS: Patients from Poland and Germany with independent indication for colonoscopy were randomised into three arms of this trial: EC, CAC and SC. Exclusion criteria were age \u003c18 years, active Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis, known stenosis and post-colonic resection status.\nRESULTS: A total of 585 patients (195 SC, 189 EC and 186 CAC) were enrolled in this study. Indications were not different between the groups (colorectal cancer screening 51%, diagnostic colonoscopy in 31% and post-polypectomy follow-up in 18%; p = 0.94). Withdrawal time was a mean of 7 min in all groups (p = 0.658), and bowel preparation did not differ between the groups. The time to reach the caecum was significantly reduced when using the cap (a mean of 6 min for CAC vs. 7 min for SC; p = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of the ADR between the groups (EC 32%, CAC 30%, SC 30%; p = 0.815). EC proved to be superior (EC vs. SC) in the sigmoid colon and transverse colon for polyp detection.\nCONCLUSION: The use of EC increased the total number of polyps seen during colonoscopy. In contrast to recent studies, no significant improvement of the ADR was detected.","tracks":[]}