View clinical trials related to Colonic Polyps.
Filter by:Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) is the current standard for effective endoscopic resection of such colon adenomas. If resection is possible in one piece (so-called "en bloc" resection) then recurrence rates are low. However, most non-pedunculated polyps >2 cm are removed in pieces ("piece-meal" resection) which leads to disease recurrence rates between 12-30%. In the March 2019 issue of Gastroenterology Bourke et al. presented that post-EMR ablation of the resection margins using soft coagulation with the tip of a resection snare reduces adenoma recurrence to 5% compared to 21% recurrence found in the control group. Hybrid Argon Plasma Coagulation (h-APC) combines an ablation technique (APC) with the option for submucosal saline injection using a high-pressure water jet. The technique allows to lift of dysplastic epithelium thus creating a safety cushion under the mucosa is lifted with a saline injection and then to ablate larger areas more thoroughly and with a higher energy setting, with a low risk for side effects or complications.
This is a single centre, non-randomized, tandem colonoscopy trial of the NISInspire-C System, followed immediately by a conventional colonoscope (CC). Each trial subject will undergo colonoscopy using the NISInspire-C system, followed immediately by CC. The purpose of this study is to obtain observational data on the safety profile, feasibility and usability of the NISInspire-C System in performing diagnostic colonoscopy in human subjects. The level of procedural pain experienced by subjects will also be explored.
In recent years, with the continuous development of artificial intelligence, automatic polyp detection systems have shown its potential in increasing the colorectal lesions. Yet, whether this system can increase polyp and adenoma detection rates in the real clinical setting is still need to be proved. The primary objective of this study is to examine whether a combination of colonoscopy and a deep learning-based automatic polyp detection system is a feasible way to increase adenoma detection rate compared to standard colonoscopy.
Initially developed in Japan for the treatment of endemic superficial gastric cancers, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) allows resection of pre-neoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the digestive tract into a single fragment. It allows a perfect pathological analysis, and decreases the rate of recurrence of the adenoma to less than 2% However, this procedure, which is technically more challenging, is also more risky (perforation rate at 4% vs. 1% for WF-EMR) and longer. Submucosal dissection is also more expensive in terms of equipment, but this difference can be offset by the cost of the high number of iterative colonoscopies required in patients who have had endoscopic resection by WF-EMR. Scientific debate is agitating the Western world1,2 and Japanese experts do not perform WF-EMR anymore, whereas no comparative prospective study has compared these two procedures. We therefore propose to compare these two endoscopic resection strategies in terms of recurrence rate at 6 months and to estimate the differential cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios over a 36-month time horizon.
Loop formation is the most frequent cause of cecal intubation failure during colonoscopy. To reduce the loop formation, external abdominal pressure is widely used and proved to be helpful. Properly applied pressure can also decrease patients discomfort and shorten the cecal intubation time. The loop formation during water exchange is less severe as compared with during air insufflation and can be reduced quite readily. Traditionally an assistant is not asked to administer abdominal compression until the endoscopist has struggled for some time and failed to reduce the loops by withdrawal. The colonoscopist can administer the abdominal compression whenever the scope is not advancing smoothly, probably in the early stage of loop formation. We test the hypothesis that colonoscopist administered abdominal compression to remove loops in their early stage of formation hastens cecal intubation. A total of 120patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio (n=60 per group). When the tip of the scope doesn't advance or paradoxical movements occur, loop reduction by withdrawal of the scope will be implemented. If looping persists, abdominal compression will be applied. In the endoscopist-administered abdominal compression (endoscopist) group, the colonoscopist will apply the compression with his right hand and counter the pressure by pushing the back of the patient with his left forearm with the colonoscope in his left hand. The compression will be administered at left lower quadrant when the scope is in the sigmoid colon and at left lower quadrant and upper abdomen, respectively, when the scope tip reaches the transverse or ascending colon. If the formation of loop cannot be overcome, an assistant will apply the abdominal compression instead. In the assistant-administered abdominal compression (assistant) group, an endoscopic assistant will apply abdominal compression when a loop is formed. The assistant will apply the compression at the left lower quadrant initially, but quickly shift to other parts as needed depending on the tip location of colonoscope. If manual compressions fail, then the patients' position will be changed.
61 subjects (male or female) between the ages of 45 and 75 will undergo colonoscopy. The primary outcome is Cecal Intubation
This study is collecting standard of care information pertaining to the use of the accessory device and patient outcomes when this double balloon accessory device is used during endoscopic procedures in the colon.
Previous studies that examined whether the presence of an additional observer, more specifically a GI fellow, during colonoscopy can enhance detection of all polyps and adenomas yielded conflicting results. Of note, all of the aforementioned studies were retrospective and robust evidence derived from well—designed randomized controlled trials are lacking. The study objective is to examine whether fellow participation during screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy influence overall, size-specific, or location-specific adenoma or polyp detection rate. It will be planned to enroll 812 patients (406 per arms) within 1 year. Adenoma detection rate will be the primary outcome.
Colonoscopy is the standard of care for the detection of colorectal polyps and adenoma, and colorectal cancer detection. Despite a meticulous evaluation of the colonic mucosa during colonoscopy, a substantial number of colorectal polyps might be missed and colorectal cancer might not be prevented. Previous studies described a 12-28% of miss-rate for all polyps, a 31% for hyperplastic polyps and 6-27% for adenomas, with a higher miss rate noted for smaller polyps. The lesion missing rate depends on several factors, such as the location on difficult areas to be evaluated with conventional colonoscopes (the proximal side of the ileocecal valve, haustral folds, flexures or rectal valves), a flat shape, an inadequate bowel preparation and inadequate endoscopy technique, a time-limited colonoscope withdrawal. If the standard 140º angle of view colonoscope is used approximately 13% of the colonic surface is unevaluated. The incorporation of colonoscopes with a 170-degree wide angled could improve adenoma detection rate. The introduction of high definition (HD) colonoscopes and visual image enhancement technologies, such as narrow band imaging (NBI, Olympus America, Center Valley, PA), I-SCAN™ (Pentax Medical, Montvale, NJ) and Fuji Intelligent Chromo-Endoscopy (FICE™, Fujinon Endoscopy, Wayne, NJ) have improved the lesion characterization; however, several studies have failed to prove an increase in the adenoma detection rates. The Third Eye Retroscope (Avantis Medical Systems, Sunnyvale, CA) is a disposable retrograde viewing device advanced through the accessory channel of a standard colonoscope. It allows retrograde viewing behind colonic folds and flexures simultaneously with the forward view of the colon. Although it shows an increase in the adenoma detection rate by 11%-25%, it has many disadvantages. First, it requires a separate processor and the device is disposable, increasing the cost of the procedure. Second, it occupies the working channel of the colonoscope, limiting the ability to suction. Third, if a polyp is detected, the viewing device has to be removed in order to perform the polypectomy. Fourth, the optic is not high definition and finally, the endoscopist has to get used to visualizing and processing two simultaneous video streams from the colonoscopy and from the retroscope device.
This study compares different approaches to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (≥20mm) in a 2 x 2 randomized design. The first randomization will assign half of patients to polyp resection with electrocautery ("hot" snare EMR) and half of patient to polyp resection without electrocautery ("cold" snare EMR). The second randomization will assign half of patients to polyp removal using Eleview as the submucosal injection agent, and the other half using placebo (normal saline with methylene blue) as the submucosal injection agent.