Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: The TERRACE study

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Volumn 73, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 480-489

  Leufkens, Anke M ^a   Demarco, Daniel C ^b   Rastogi, Amit ^c   Akerman, Paul A ^d   Azzouzi, Kassem ^e   Rothstein, Richard I ^f   Vleggaar, Frank P ^a   Repici, Alessandro ^g   Rando, Giacomo ^g   Okolo, Patrick I ^h   Dewit, Olivier ^e   Ignjatovic, Ana ⁱ   Odstrcil, Elizabeth ^b   East, James ⁱ   Deprez, Pierre H ^e   Saunders, Brian P ⁱ   Kalloo, Anthony N ^h   Creel, Bradley ^b   Singh, Vikas ^c   Lennon, Anne Marie ^h   Siersema, Peter D ^a   more..

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b BAYLOR UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d Bayside Endoscopy Center   (United States)

^e CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

^f DARTMOUTH HITCHCOCK MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g HUMANITAS CLINICAL AND RESEARCH CENTER   (Italy)

^h JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

ⁱ ST MARK S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

adenoma detection rate; ADR; intent to treat; ITT; PDR; polyp detection rate; SC; standard colonoscopy; TEC; TER; Third Eye colonoscopy; Third Eye Retroscope

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CECUM; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CLINICAL STUDY; COLONOSCOPE; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL ADENOMA; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTUBATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECTUM POLYP; RETROGRADE VIEWING DEVICE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADENOMA; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COLONIC POLYPS; COLONOSCOPES; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79952061513     PISSN: 00165107     EISSN: 10976779     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.09.004     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Lieberman DA. Quality and colonoscopy: anewimperative. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:392-4.
2. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1296-308. (Pubitemid 34664769)
3. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Mark DG, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112:24-8. (Pubitemid 27008981)
4. Van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Dekker E, et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systemic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101: 343-50. (Pubitemid 43381678)
5. Heresbach D, Barrioz T, Ponchon T, et al. Miss rate for colorectal neoplastic polyps: a prospective multicenter study of back-to-back video colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2008;40:284-90. (Pubitemid 351524375)
6. Pabby A, Schoen RE, Schatzkin A, et al. Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary Polyp Prevention Trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:385-91. (Pubitemid 40349030)
7. Postic G, Lewin D, Wallace MB, et al. Colonoscopic miss rates determined by direct comparison of colonoscopy with colon resection specimens. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:3182-5. (Pubitemid 35424594)
8. Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Schindler WR, et al. Location of adenomas missed by optical colonoscopy. Ann Intern Med 2004;141:352-9.
9. Triadafilopoulos G, Li J. A pilot study to assess the safety and efficacy of the Third Eye retrograde auxiliary imaging system during colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2008;40:478-82. (Pubitemid 351911836)
10. Waye JD, Heigh RI, Rex DK, et al. A retrograde-viewing device improves detection of adenomas in the colon: a prospective efficacy evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:551-6.
11. DeMarco DC, Odstrcil E, Lara LF, et al. Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope Study Group. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:542-50.
12. Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:482-6. (Pubitemid 38437086)
13. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:225-49.
14. Ferlay J, Parkin DM, Steliarova-Foucher E. Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:765-81.
15. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Inadomi JM, et al. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2008. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:739-50.
16. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:627-37.
17. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Rex DK, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1872-85.
18. Levin B, Lieberman DA, Winawer SJ, et al. American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Advisory Group; US Multi-Society Task Force; American College of Radiology Colon Cancer Committee. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2008;58:130-60. (Pubitemid 351830299)
19. Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;58:76-9. (Pubitemid 38208751)
20. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Vader JP, et al. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:378-84. (Pubitemid 40349029)
21. Rex DK. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:2866-77. (Pubitemid 44902662)
22. Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH, et al. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;24:965-71. (Pubitemid 44326377)
23. Rex DK. Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2000;51:33-6. (Pubitemid 30051607)
24. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2533-41. (Pubitemid 44917501)
25. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Greenlaw RL. Effect of a time-dependent colonoscopic withdrawal protocol on adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:1091-8.
26. Deenadayalu VP, Chadalawada V, Rex DK. 170 degree wide-angle colonoscope: effect on efficiency and miss rates. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:2138-42. (Pubitemid 39524703)
27. Rex DK, Chadalawada V, Helper DJ. Wide angle colonoscopy with a prototype instrument: impact on miss rates and efficiency as determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2000-5. (Pubitemid 37185796)
28. Fatima H, Rex DK, Rahmani E, et al. Wide-angle (WA) (170 angle of view) versus standard (ST) (140 angle of view) colonoscopy [abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc 2006;63:AB204.
29. East JE, Stavrindis M, Thomas-Gibson S, et al. A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008;28:768-76.
30. Pellisé M, Fernández-Esparrach G, Cárdenas A, et al. Impact of wide-angle, high-definition endoscopy in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1062-8.
31. Burke CA, Choure AG, Sanaka MR, et al. A comparison of high-definition versus conventional colonoscopes for polyp detection. Dig Dis Sci 2010; 55:1716-20.
32. Matsushita M, Hajiro K, Okazaki K, et al. Efficacy of total colonoscopy with a transparent cap in comparison with colonoscopy without the cap. Endoscopy 1998;30:444-7. (Pubitemid 28353551)
33. Hewett DG, Rex DK. Cap-fitted colonoscopy: a randomized, tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc. Epub 2010 Jun 23.
34. Lee YT, Lai LH, Hui AJ, et al. Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:41-6.
35. Sawhney MS, Cury MS, Neeman N. Effect of institution-wide policy of colonoscopy withdrawal time ≥7 minutes on polyp detection. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1892-8.
36. Inadomi JM. In search of quality colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 2008; 135:1845-62.
37. Sonnenberg A. Inflationary caution in GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:789-91.