...
首页> 外文期刊>Gastrointestinal Endoscopy >Efficacy of computed virtual chromoendoscopy on colorectal cancer screening: a prospective, randomized, back-to-back trial of Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement versus conventional colonoscopy to compare adenoma miss rates.
【24h】

Efficacy of computed virtual chromoendoscopy on colorectal cancer screening: a prospective, randomized, back-to-back trial of Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement versus conventional colonoscopy to compare adenoma miss rates.

机译:计算机虚拟层析内窥镜检查在结直肠癌筛查中的功效:Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement与传统结肠镜检查进行的一项前瞻性,随机,背对背试验,以比较腺瘤漏诊率。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the criterion standard for screening of colorectal neoplasms. Nonetheless, a substantial miss rate with conventional, white-light colonoscopy (WL) remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement (FICE) can detect more adenomas than WL in screening colonoscopy. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized trial of tandem colonoscopy adjusted for withdrawal time and lavage effect. SETTING: Seoul National University Hospital Healthcare System Gangnam Center, Korea. PATIENTS: This study involved 359 average-risk adults undergoing screening colonoscopy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to the first withdrawal with either FICE (FICE-WL group) or WL (WL-FICE group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point measure was the difference in adenoma miss rates, and the secondary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate. RESULTS: We enrolled 359 patients (mean age 50.6 years, male 66.9%) and randomly assigned 181 to the WL-FICE group and 178 to the FICE-WL group. The number of adenomas detected by FICE and WL was 123 and 107, respectively. The adenoma miss rate with FICE showed no significant difference compared with that of WL (6.6% vs 8.3%, P = .59). Characteristics of lesions missed by use of FICE were similar to those missed by use of WL; 93% of overall missed polyps were < or =5 mm, and none were > or =1 cm. All missed adenomas were low grade and nonpedunculated. There was no significant difference between FICE and WL in adenoma detection rate (mean 0.64 vs 0.55 per patient, P = .65) nor percentage of patients with > or =1 adenoma (33.7% vs 30.4%, P = .74). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSION: FICE at screening colonoscopy did not improve the adenoma miss rate or detection rate compared with WL.
机译:背景:结肠镜检查是筛查大肠肿瘤的标准标准。尽管如此,传统的白光结肠镜检查(WL)的误检率仍然是一个挑战。目的:评估在筛查结肠镜检查中,Fuji Intelligent Color Enhancement(FICE)是否可以比WL检测更多的腺瘤。设计:前瞻性,随机试验的串联结肠镜检查针对停药时间和灌洗效果进行了调整。地点:韩国首尔国立大学医院医疗系统江南中心。患者:这项研究涉及359名接受结肠镜检查的中等风险成人。干预:将患者随机分为FICE(FICE-WL组)或WL(WL-FICE组)第一次停药。主要观察指标:主要终点指标是腺瘤漏检率的差异,次要指标是腺瘤检出率。结果:我们招募了359例患者(平均年龄50.6岁,男性66.9%),并随机分配WL-FICE组181例和FICE-WL组178例。 FICE和WL检测到的腺瘤数量分别为123和107。与WL相比,FICE的腺瘤漏检率没有显着差异(6.6%比8.3%,P = 0.59)。 FICE遗漏的病变特征与WL遗漏的相似。总体漏诊息肉的93%为<或= 5 mm,没有一个为>或= 1 cm。所有错过的腺瘤均为低级且无蒂。 FICE和WL在腺瘤检出率方面无显着差异(平均0.64 vs 0.55 /每例,P = 0.65),也没有大于或等于1腺瘤的患者百分比(33.7%vs 30.4%,P = 0.74)。局限性:单中心研究。结论:与WL相比,结肠镜筛查的FICE不能改善腺瘤漏诊率或检出率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号