Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Feb;36(2):376-382.
doi: 10.1111/jgh.15331. Epub 2020 Dec 2.

AmplifEYE assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: A randomized controlled study

Shun Fung Sze  1 , Wing I Cheung  2 , Wai Chuen Wong  2 , Yee Tak Hui  1 , Jodis Ting Wa Lam  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

AmplifEYE assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: A randomized controlled study

Shun Fung Sze et al. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Background and aim: AmplifEYE is a mucosal exposure device mounted to the tip of colonoscope to improve polyp or adenoma detection. We aim to compare the adenoma detection rates (ADR) of AmplifEYE-assisted colonoscopy (AC) with standard colonoscopy (SC).

Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial involving patients aged 50 to 79 who underwent AC or SC in two centers. Procedures were performed by five experienced colonoscopists.

Results: Three hundred fifty-five patients were recruited, with 334 patients (170 AC and 164 SC) included into analysis. The ADR was numerically higher in AC (47.1%) versus SC (40.9%), P = 0.253. The polyp detection rate (PDR) in AC was 68.2% versus 54.3% in SC, P = 0.009, and serrated polyp detection rate (SDR) in AC was 37.6% versus 20.1% in SC, P < 0.001, both statistically significant higher in the study group. The mean cecal intubation time was shorter with AmplifEYE (8.0 min in AC vs 8.9 min in SC, P = 0.030), and there was no difference in pain score (3 in AC vs 4 in SC, P = 0.121).

Conclusions: AmplifEYE-assisted colonoscopy significantly improved the PDR and SDR, while the ADR was numerically higher in AC that did not reach statistical significance. Using the device resulted in shorter cecal intubation time and did not cause more pain.

Keywords: adenoma detection rate; colonoscopy; colorectal cancer screening; mucosal exposure device; polyp detection rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomatarm I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2018; 68: 394-424.
    1. Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P et al. Long term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013; 369: 1095-1105.
    1. Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 24-28.
    1. Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014; 370: 1298-1306.
    1. Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010; 362: 1795-1803.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources