Retrograde-viewing device improves adenoma detection rate in colonoscopies for surveillance and diagnostic workup

World Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 18, Issue 26, 2012, Pages 3400-3408

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

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Department of Gastroenterology   (United States)

^d CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

^e DARTMOUTH HITCHCOCK MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f HUMANITAS CLINICAL AND RESEARCH CENTER   (Italy)

^g JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^h ST MARK S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ BAYLOR UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Adenomas; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer; Miss rates; Retrograde viewing

Indexed keywords

ADENOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COLONOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCREENING TEST; THIRD EYE COLONOSCOPY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EID: 84863915276     PISSN: 10079327     EISSN: 22192840     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i26.3400     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, Levin TR, Burt RW, Johnson DA, Kirk LM, Litlin S, Lieberman DA, Waye JD, Church J, Marshall JB, Riddell RH. 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: 1296-1308
2. Lieberman D. Quality and colonoscopy: a new imperative. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 392-394
3. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT, Rahmani EY, Clark DW, Helper DJ, Lehman GA, Mark DG. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 24-28
4. van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, Bossuyt PM, van Deventer SJ, Dekker E. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 343-350
5. Heresbach D, Barrioz T, Lapalus MG, Coumaros D, Bauret P, Potier P, Sautereau D, Boustière C, Grimaud JC, Barthé-lémy C, Sée J, Serraj I, D'Halluin PN, Branger B, Ponchon T. Miss rate for colorectal neoplastic polyps: a prospective multi center study of back-to-back video colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 284-290
6. Postic G, Lewin D, Bickerstaff C, Wallace MB. Colonoscopic miss rates determined by direct comparison of colonoscopy with colon resection specimens. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 3182-3185
7. Pabby A, Schoen RE, Weissfeld JL, Burt R, Kikendall JW, Lance P, Shike M, Lanza E, Schatzkin A. Analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence during surveillance colonoscopy in the dietary Polyp Prevention Trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 385-391
8. Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA, Choi JR, Schindler WR. Location of adenomas missed by optical colonoscopy. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 352-359
9. Triadaflopoulos G, Li J. A pilot study to assess the safety and effcacy of the Third Eye retrograde auxiliary imaging system during colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 478-482
10. Waye JD, Heigh RI, Fleischer DE, Leighton JA, Gurudu S, Aldrich LB, Li J, Ramrakhiani S, Edmundowicz SA, Early DS, Jonnalagadda S, Bresalier RS, Kessler WR, Rex DK. A retrograde-viewing device improves detection of adenomas in the colon: a prospective efficacy evaluation (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 551-556
11. DeMarco DC, Odstrcil E, Lara LF, Bass D, Herdman C, Kinney T, Gupta K, Wolf L, Dewar T, Deas TM, Mehta MK, Anwer MB, Pellish R, Hamilton JK, Polter D, Reddy KG, Hanan I. 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: 542-550
12. Leufkens AM, DeMarco DC, Rastogi A, Akerman PA, Az-zouzi K, Rothstein RI, Vleggaar FP, Repici A, Rando G, Okolo PI, Dewit O, Ignjatovic A, Odstrcil E, East J, Deprez PH, Saunders BP, Kalloo AN, Creel B, Singh V, Lennon AM, Siersema PD. Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 480-489
13. Saini SD, Schoenfeld P, Vijan S. Surveillance colonoscopy is cost-effective for patients with adenomas who are at high risk of colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2292-2299, 2299.e1
14. Saini SD, Fendrick AM. Value-based insurance design: implications for gastroenterology. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 767-769
15. Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 482-486
16. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, Smith RA, Brooks D, Andrews KS, Dash C, Giardiello FM, Glick S, Levin TR, Pickhardt P, Rex DK, Thorson A, Winawer SJ. 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: 130-160
17. Van Gelder RE, Nio CY, Florie J, Bartelsman JF, Snel P, De Jager SW, Van Deventer SJ, Laméris JS, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J. Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2004; 127: 41-48
18. Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonos-copy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 76-79
19. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multi center study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-384
20. Rex DK. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 2866-2877
21. Rex DK. Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 33-36
22. Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH, Petersen BT, Wang KK, Boyd-Enders F, Ott BJ. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 24: 965-971
23. Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS, Johanson JF, Greenlaw RL. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
24. 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: 1091-1098
25. Rex DK, Hewett DG, Raghavendra M, Chalasani N. The impact of videorecording on the quality of colonoscopy performance: a pilot study. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 2312-2317
26. Lee RH, Tang RS, Muthusamy VR, Ho SB, Shah NK, Wetzel L, Bain AS, Mackintosh EE, Paek AM, Crissien AM, Saraf LJ, Kalmaz DM, Savides TJ. Quality of colonoscopy withdrawal technique and variability in adenoma detection rates (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 128-134
27. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, Wong RK, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA, Schindler WR. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2191-2200
28. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC, Palesch YY, Mauldin PD, Hoffman B, Vining DJ, Small WC, Affronti J, Rex D, Ko-pecky KK, Ackerman S, Burdick JS, Brewington C, Turner MA, Zfass A, Wright AR, Iyer RB, Lynch P, Sivak MV, Butler H. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multi center comparison with standard colo-noscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 2004; 291: 1713-1719
29. Lee YT, Lai LH, Hui AJ, Wong VW, Ching JY, Wong GL, Wu JC, Chan HL, Leung WK, Lau JY, Sung JJ, Chan FK. Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 41-46
30. Harada Y, Hirasawa D, Fujita N, Noda Y, Kobayashi G, Ishida K, Yonechi M, Ito K, Suzuki T, Sugawara T, Hora-guchi J, Takasawa O, Obana T, Oohira T, Onochi K, Kanno Y, Kuroha M, Iwai W. Impact of a transparent hood on the performance of total colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 637-644
31. Tee HP, Corte C, Al-Ghamdi H, Prakoso E, Darke J, Chet-tiar R, Rahman W, Davison S, Griffn SP, Selby WS, Kaffes AJ. Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy. World J Gas-troenterol 2010; 16: 3905-3910
32. Hewett DG, Rex DK. Cap-fitted colonoscopy: a randomized, tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 775-781
33. Rex DK. Accessing proximal aspects of folds and flexures during colonoscopy: impact of a pediatric colonoscope with a short bending section. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 1504-1507
34. Harrison M, Singh N, Rex DK. Impact of proximal colon retrofexion on adenoma miss rates. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 519-522
35. Hewett DG, Rex DK. Miss rate of right-sided colon examination during colonoscopy defined by retrofexion: an observational study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 246-252
36. Mysliwiec PA, Brown ML, Klabunde CN, Ransohoff DF. Are physicians doing too much colonoscopy? A national survey of colorectal surveillance after polypectomy. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 264-271
37. Saini SD, Nayak RS, Kuhn L, Schoenfeld P. Why don't gastroenterologists follow colon polyp surveillance guidelines?: results of a national survey. J Clin Gastroenterol 2009; 43: 554-558