Colonoscopy Clinical Trial
Official title:
Retroflexion In The Ascending Colon Is A Costless Endoscopic Maneuver Increasing Adenoma Detection Rate
Missing polyps during colonoscopy is considered an important factor for interval cancer appearance especially in the ascending colon (AC). Aim of the study: To evaluate the contribution of retroflexion to adenoma detection in the AC. Patients-Methods: Prospective observational study included consecutive patients with complete colonoscopy between June 2017 and June 2018. The AC was examined in two phases. The first phase included two forward views from the hepatic flexure to the cecum and the second phase a retroflexion in the cecum, inspection till the hepatic flexure then redressing to forward view and reinsertion to the cecum.
We prospectively evaluated for polyp detection in the ascending colon a cohort of consecutive
patients addressed (intended) for complete colonoscopy in Alexandra University Hospital,
Athens, Greece for a predetermined period (June 2017-June 2018). All colonoscopies were
performed under conscious sedation by using midazolam and/or propofol and continuous
monitoring for vital signs. The type of endoscopes used were adult high definition, with
variable stiffness, colonoscopes Olympus Evis Exera CF-H185 and 190. Insufflation was
performed by means of a CO2 insufflator (OLYMPUS - UCR). An irrigation pump (OLYMPUS - OFP2)
was used if needed, either for washing or for water exchange technique according to the
endoscopist judgement. Oral sodium and potassium sulphate in combination (Eziclen®) or PEG
solutions (Klean Prep® or Fortrans®) were used for bowel preparation which was measured by
means of the Segmental Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Inclusion criteria were as follows:
Patients older than 18 years, with a complete colonoscopy, for CRC screening or
post-polypectomy surveillance or diagnostic assessment. Exclusion criteria precluded patients
with previous colectomy or an abdominal surgery in the last 6 months, patients with polyposis
syndromes or inflammatory bowel diseases and if they were unfit for polypectomy or the polyp
specimen was not retrieved for histology. The protocol of ascending colon examination
encompassed 2 phases: A first phase (1) divided in Forward view (1a) videlicet insertion from
the right flexure to the caecum followed by a second forward view (1b) namely withdrawal till
the right flexure and reinsertion to the caecum maintaining the endoscope straight and a
second phase (2, Retroflexion) with U-turn of the colonoscope in the caecum till the right
flexure and then redressing to the forward view and reinsertion to the caecum.
Concerning endoscopy 2 seniors and 4 trainees participated in the study. All colonoscopies
were performed with at least 2 operators, one senior and one trainee. The main investigator,
the most experienced endoscopist in the department was present during all the procedures for
the ascending colon examination (SM). Only 3 attempts were permitted for retroflexion
achievement, performed by the main investigator if a younger trainee or senior
gastroenterologist could not perform it. Polyps were mapped during both phases and were not
removed until the end of the inspection. Polypectomy followed according to the previous
mapping and all polyps were collected and sent for histological examination. The protocol of
this non-interventional study as well as the informed consent for the patients were submitted
and approved by the local ethical committee.
Adenoma detection rate (ADR) was defined as the number of colonoscopies in which one or more
adenomas were detected, divided by the total number of colonoscopies. ADR in the ascending
colon as the number of colonoscopies with at least one adenoma in the ascending colon divided
by the total number of colonoscopies. Adenoma miss rate (AMR) of the ascending colon was
defined as the number of additional adenomas in ascending colon detected by retroflexed view
divided by the total adenomas in ascending colon detected with two forward and retroflexion
views. The per-patient miss rate was calculated as the number of patients with additional
adenomas detected on retroflexion divided by the total number of patients who underwent the
examination.
Finally we evaluated two additional quality parameters in order to assess the contribution of
retroflexion in adenoma detection: adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) calculated by dividing the
number of detected adenomas by the total number of colonoscopies and adenomas per positive
participant (APP) calculated by dividing the number of detected adenomas by the number of
colonoscopies in which at least 1 adenoma was detected.
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT04101097 -
Training and Validation of Models of Factors to Predict Inadequate Bowel Preparation Colonoscopy
|
||
Completed |
NCT03247595 -
Testing How Well Magnesium Citrate Capsules Work as Preparation for a Colonoscopy
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04214301 -
An Open-Label Preference Evaluation of BLI800
|
Phase 4 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT05754255 -
Comparison of High-flow Oxygen With or Without Nasal Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) During Propofol Sedation for Colonoscopy in an Ambulatory Surgical Center
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT02484105 -
Comforting Conversation During Colonoscopy: A Trial on Patient Satisfaction
|
Phase 4 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02264249 -
Residual Gastric Volume in Same Day Versus Split Dose and Evening Before Bowel Preparation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01964417 -
The Comparative Study Between Bowel Preparation Method
|
Phase 3 | |
Terminated |
NCT01978509 -
The Affect of Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Hospitalized Patients Colonoscopies
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT01685970 -
Comparison of Same-day 2 Sachets Picosulfate Versus High Volume PEG for Afternoon Colonoscopy
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT01518790 -
Short Course, Single-dose PEG 3350 for Colonoscopy Prep in Children
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT00748293 -
Achievement of Better Examinee Compliance on Colon Cleansing Using Commercialized Low-Residue Diet
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00779649 -
MoviPrep® Versus HalfLytely®, Low-VolUme PEG Solutions for Colon Cleansing: An InvesTigator-blindEd, Randomized, Trial
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00671177 -
Clinical Evaluation of Water Immersion Colonoscopy Insertion Technique
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00380497 -
Pico-Salax Versus Poly-Ethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleanout Before Colonoscopy in Children
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT00160823 -
Impact of a Self-Administered Information Leaflet on Adequacy of Colonic Cleansing for in-Hospital Patients
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00314418 -
Patient Position and Impact on Colonoscopy Time
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00390598 -
PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy
|
Phase 2/Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00427089 -
Comparison of 2L NRL994 With NaP Preparation in Colon Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopies for Colon Tumor Screening
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00209573 -
A Study of AQUAVAN® Injection Versus Midazolam HCl for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Elective Colonoscopy
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT05823350 -
The Effect of Abdominal Massage on Pain and Distention After Colonoscopy
|
N/A |