A motor-driven single-use colonoscope controlled with a hand-held device: a feasibility study in volunteers

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Volumn 67, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1139-1146

  Rösch, Thomas ^a   Adler, Andreas ^a   Pohl, Heiko ^a   Wettschureck, Elke ^a   Koch, Martin ^a   Wiedenmann, Bertram ^a   Hoepffner, Nicolas ^a  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CECUM; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLON; COLONOSCOPE; COLONOSCOPY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL PAIN; HUMAN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGMOID;

ADULT; ANIMALS; COLONOSCOPES; COLONOSCOPY; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ANIMAL; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PILOT PROJECTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SWINE; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 44349191500     PISSN: 00165107     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.10.065     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Winawer S., Fletcher R., Rex D., et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124 (2003) 544-560
2. Schmiegel W., Pox C., Adler G., et al. S3-Guidelines conference "colorectal carcinoma" 2004. [German]. Z Gastroenterol 42 (2004) 1129-1177
3. Lieberman D.A. Cost-effectiveness model for colon cancer screening. Gastroenterology 109 (1995) 1781-1790
4. Altenhofen L., Knoepnadel J., Schmiegel W., et al. Acceptance and findings of the first nationwide screening colonoscopy round in Germany. [abstract]. Gastroenterology 128 (2005) A96
5. Gili M., Roca M., Ferrer V., et al. Psychosocial factors associated with the adherence to a colorectal cancer screening program. Cancer Detect Prev 30 (2006) 354-360
6. Bleiker E.M., Menko F.H., Taal B.G., et al. Screening behavior of individuals at high risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 128 (2005) 280-287
7. Rex D.K., and Khalfan H.K. Sedation and the technical performance of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am 15 (2005) 661-672
8. Hoff G., Bretthauer M., Huppertz-Hauss G., et al. Evaluation of a novel colonoscope designed for easier passage through flexures: a randomized study. Endoscopy 37 (2005) 1123-1126
9. Lee Y.T., Hui A.J., Wong V.W., et al. Improved colonoscopy success rate with a distally attached mucosectomy cap. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 739-742
10. Kondo S., Yamaji Y., Watabe H., et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope. Am J Gastroenterol 102 (2007) 75-81
11. Fritscher-Ravens A., Fox S., Swain C.P., et al. CathCam guide wire-directed colonoscopy: first pilot study in patients with a previous incomplete colonoscopy. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 209-213
12. Eickhoff A., Jakobs R., Kamal A., et al. In vitro evaluation of forces exerted by a new computer-assisted colonoscope (the NeoGuide Endoscopy System). Endoscopy 38 (2006) 1224-1229
13. Eickhoff A., van Dam J., Jakobs R., et al. Computer-assisted colonoscopy (the NeoGuide endoscopy system): results of the first human clinical trial ("PACE study"). Am J Gastroenterol 102 (2007) 261-266
14. Pfeffer J., Grinshpon R., Rex D., et al. The Aer-O-Scope: proof of the concept of a pneumatic, skill-independent, self-propelling, self-navigating colonoscope in a pig model. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 144-148
15. Vucelic B., Rex D., Pulanic R., et al. The Aer-O-Scope: proof of concept of a pneumatic, skill-independent, self-propelling, self-navigating colonoscope. Gastroenterology 130 (2006) 672-677
16. Eliakim R., Fireman Z., Gralnek I.M., et al. Evaluation of the PillCam colon capsule in the detection of colonic pathology: results of the first multicenter, prospective, comparative study. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 963-970
17. Schoofs N., Devière J., and Van Gossum A. PillCam colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy for colorectal tumor diagnosis: a prospective pilot study. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 971-977
18. Arber N., Grinshpon R., Maor L., et al. Proof of concept study of the Aer-O-Scope omni-directional colonoscopic viewing system in ex-vivo and in-vivo porcine models. Endoscopy 39 (2007) 412-417
19. Nelson D.B. Recent advances in epidemiology and prevention of gastrointestinal endoscopy related infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis 18 (2005) 326-330
20. Leiss O., Beilenhoff U., Bader L., et al. Reprocessing of flexible endoscopes and endoscopic accessories-an international comparison of guidelines. [German]. Z Gastroenterol 40 (2002) 531-542
21. Nelson D.B., Bosco J.J., Curtis W.D., et al. ASGE technology status evaluation report: automatic endoscope reprocessors. Gastrointest Endosc 50 (1999) 925-927
22. Bader L., Blumenstock G., Birkner B., et al. HYGEA (Hygiene in gastroenterology-endoscope reprocessing): study on quality of reprocessing flexible endoscopes in hospitals and in the practice setting. [German]. Z Gastroenterol 40 (2002) 157-170
23. Birkner B.R., Selbman H.K., Kleff S., et al. Mandatory hygiene control as a key of decreasing failures of endoscopic reprocessing in ambulatory care. [abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc 59 (2004) P118
24. Burdick J.S., and Hambrick D. Endoscope reprocessing and repair costs. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am 14 (2004) 717-724
25. Heldwein W., Birkner B., Strauch L., et al. Quality assurance in coloscopy in private practice and the hospital: the Gastroenterology Quality Circle (GEQC) Munich. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 121 (1996) 1040-1045
26. Bowles C.J., Leicester R., Romaya C., et al. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?. Gut 53 (2004) 277-283
27. Sieg A., and BNG Study Group. Screening colonoscopy among persons 50 to 60 years of age with and without familial risk of colorectal cancer-a prospective multicenter trial. [German]. Z Gastroenterol 41 (2003) 1077-1082
28. Vance M. The nurse colonoscopist-training and quality assurance. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am 15 (2005) 829-837
29. Van Rijn J.C., Reitsma J.B., Stoker J., et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 101 (2006) 343-350
30. Thomas-Gibson S., Rogers P., Cooper S., et al. Judgement of the quality of bowel preparation at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with variability in adenoma detection rates. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 456-460
31. Thomas-Gibson S., Rogers P.A., Suzuki N., et al. Development of a video assessment scoring method to determine the accuracy of endoscopist performance at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Endoscopy 38 (2006) 218-225
32. Barclay R.L., Vicari J.J., Doughty A.S., et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 355 (2006) 2533-2541
33. Thomeer M., Bielen D., Vanbeckevoort D., et al. Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue?. Eur Radiol 12 (2002) 1410-1415