32 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
Water exchange (WE) is an effective insertion method to minimize insertion discomfort and maximize ADR. It is characterized by infusing water to guide insertion in an airless lumen with suctioning of infused water during insertion and almost complete removal of the infused water when cecal intubation is achieved. A modified Delphi review reported water exchange showed the highest overall ADR, ADR in screening cases, and in the right side of the colon compared with water immersion and air (or CO2) insufflation. One of the plausible mechanisms of improving ADR by water exchange is salvage cleaning during insertion, which might help artificial intelligence by removing the interference of fecal debris and bubbles. However, no RCT has been performed to evaluate the effect of CADe on WE colonoscopy. Therefore, investigators will conduct a RCT comparing the ADR of CADe assisted colonoscopy inserted with either WE or insufflation. Our hypothesis will be that CADe assisted WE colonoscopy achieves higher ADR than CADe assisted air insufflation colonoscopy.
This is a prospective equivalence colonoscopy study evaluating whether overall adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a reliable alternate for screening ADR. Overall indication includes screening, surveillance, and diagnostic indications.
The investigators' null hypothesis is that a withdrawal time of 9 to 10 minutes is non-inferior to a withdrawal time of 12 minutes or greater. Thus, the goal of this tandem design trial is to compare the additional diagnostic yield (# of missed lesions) for withdrawal times exceeding 10 minutes for screening/surveillance colonoscopies. Although withdrawal times longer than the standard 6-minute recommendation have been shown to be beneficial, there is limited prospective evidence investigating the benefit or lack thereof for withdrawal times greater than 9-10 minutes.
The study is intended to compare the detection rate obtained by performing G-EYE® high definition colonoscopy vs. the detection rate obtained by performing ECV high definition colonoscopy.
A retrospective and prospective study to determine if the use of ambient lighting during screening colonoscopy is well tolerated and if ambient lighting will help physicians maintain adenoma detection rates while decreasing symptoms of eye strain as the day progresses.
The purpose of this investigator-initiated study is to determine whether the use of an accessory device called AmplifEYE can improve colonoscopy quality in patients who are undergoing average risk colorectal cancer screening. Primary end point is adenoma detection rates.
The goal of this study is to compare two FDA approved distal colonoscope attachment devices, in order to identify which device can increase adenoma detection rate the most without increasing procedure time or risk.
Colonoscopy( examining the colon with a flexible tube and a camera ) is usually done for screening purposes to find any precancerous lesions (polyps) at an early stage. During the colonoscopy the doctor will advance the colonoscope to the end of your colon and start examining the colon for any polyps. "Withdrawal time" is the period of time the doctor spends examining the colon. Doctors usually spend six minutes examining the colon after they reach the end of the colon. Studies have showed that spending more withdrawal time detects more lesions. The proposal to dedicating half of the withdrawal time during colonoscopy in examining the right side will increase the detection of polyps in the right side of the colon. There will be no other changes in the procedural aspect of the colonoscopy.
The goal of this study is to compare the adenoma detection rate achieved while using either a 24" video monitor or a 32" video monitor.
Interval (missed) cancers and lower than expected mortality reduction of proximal colon cancers in the United States and elsewhere after screening colonoscopy drew attention to quality indicators. Missed adenomas which are more likely to be in the proximal colon may be contributing factors. An independent predictor of the risk of interval cancers is adenoma detection rate. In pilot observations, the investigators showed that water exchange enhanced adenoma detection in the right colon (cecum to hepatic flexure). This prospective, randomized controlled trial will compare water exchange with water immersion and traditional air insufflation in patients undergoing colonoscopy. The investigators test the hypothesis that compared with air insufflation and water immersion, water exchange produces a significantly higher adenoma detection rate in the right colon.
The purpose of this study is to determine which of the methods of colonoscopy viz. water insufflation or air insufflation or carbon dioxide insufflation is better in detecting the adenomas in colon and also which of these methods is best tolerated by patients. Hypothesis: the investigators hypothesize that in patients undergoing first time screening colonoscopy a higher Adenoma Detection Rate will be found in the proximal colon in the group randomized to the water method compared to those randomized to the air or CO2 insufflation methods
Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a quality indicator of colonoscopy performed for colorectal cancer screening. Population studies have shown that traditional air colonoscopy fails to eliminate post screening colonoscopy cancers or cancer mortality in the proximal colon. The investigators aim to establish the superior effectiveness of combining chromoendoscopy with the water exchange method in detecting more proximal diminutive adenomas during screening colonoscopy in sedated Veterans. An improved adenoma detection rate associated with optical colonoscopy will minimize the risk of missed lesions. The improvement may translate into a remedy for the limitations of screening colonoscopy in the proximal colon, e.g. a higher adenoma detection rate may minimize the burden of post screening colonoscopy interval colorectal cancers among the veteran population.
This is a research study about the usefulness of transparent cap during screening colonoscopy. The purpose of the research is to test the usefulness of adding small cap to the tip of the colonoscope. the investigators hypothesis is that Cap assisted colonoscopy will improve the detection of adenomatous polyps (polyps which can become colon cancer later on) in comparison to the standard colonoscopy.
The investigators are retrospectively comparing detection rates of adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas, and size assessment of the polyps among Rush University Medical Center endoscopists. The investigators plan to review whether the size assessment of adenomatous polyps affected the surveillance protocols and if the location of polyps detected affected the detection rates.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical benefit and safety of using a computer aided detection device, Skout, for real-time polyp detection in colonoscopy procedures with the indication of screening or surveillance. One of the reasons for the development of interval colorectal cancers is polyps missed during colonoscopy. Our hypothesis is that with the aid of Skout, the adenomas detected per colonoscopy will increase, and it is plausible to believe that this increase in detection could reduce the incidence of interval cancers.
ME-APDS is a device (software-based with hardware) developed by Magentiq Eye LTD and intended to support the decision of the endoscopist on polyps which appear in the colonoscopy video during the colonoscopy procedure. This randomized two arm colonoscopy trial will mainly compare APC and APE between Magentiq Eye Assisted Colonoscopy (MEAC) and Conventional Colonoscopy (CC) in patients referred for either screening or surveillance colonoscopies.
The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of Ultivision Artificial Intelligence (AI) Software in detecting adenomas in screening colonoscopy procedures. The safety of Ultivision AI Software will also be assessed. A subset of the subjects will enter a roll-in period for clinical trial safety assessment. The remainder of subjects who are eligible will enter the detection phase which comprises a screening colonoscopy procedure. In the detection phase, subjects will be randomized to a screening colonoscopy with Ultivision AI Software enhancement or without AI Software enhancement. The study will measure the mean adenomas per colonoscopy procedure, as defined by the protocol, detected while receiving either treatment option.
This is a study to compare two different, but normally, used methods of colonoscopy in patients that require a routine or repeat colonoscopy. There will be three arms in this study: WE water control, water plus Cap-1, and water plus Cap-2. The patient will prepare himself/herself for the colonoscopy as per normal instructions and he/she will be given the information for the study at that time so that he/she can make a decision to participate in the study. The control method will use water instead of air inserted into the colon. The study method will use a new accessory, a cap that will fit onto the end of the colonoscope plus water during the procedure. This study will also confirm if using the cap method with water is a better way of detecting polyps in the colon and possibly cancer.
This study is evaluating the effect of adding a high dose of simethicone to the standard polyethylene glycol preparation for screening colonoscopy in the quality of the preparation , adenoma detection rate and withdrawal times.
Interval (missed) cancers and lower than expected mortality reduction of proximal colon cancers in the United States and elsewhere after screening colonoscopy drew attention to quality indicators. Missed adenomas which are more likely to be in the proximal colon may be contributing factors. An independent predictor of the risk of interval cancers is adenoma detection rate. In pilot observations, the investigators showed that water exchange enhanced adenoma detection in the right colon (cecum to hepatic flexure). This prospective, randomized controlled trial will compare water exchange with water immersion and traditional air insufflation in patients undergoing colonoscopy. The investigators test the hypothesis that compared with air insufflation and water immersion, water exchange produces a significantly higher adenoma detection rate in the right colon
The degree of protection afforded by colonoscopy against proximal colorectal cancer (CRC) appears to be related to the quality of the procedure, and the incomplete removal of lesions has been shown to increase the subsequent risk of developing a colon cancer. Some studies suggest that small polyps with advanced histology are more common in the right than in the left colon (right colon proximal to splenic flexure, left colon distal to the splenic flexure). The average size of polyps in the right colon with advanced pathology or containing adenocarcinoma was ≤9 mm, whereas in the left colon their average size was \>9 mm, P\<0.001. Inadequate prevention of right-sided CRC incidence and mortality may be due to right-sided polyps with advanced histology or that harbor malignancy. These presumptive precursors of cancer are smaller and possibly more easily obscured by residual feces, and more likely to be missed at colonoscopy. Water-aided colonoscopy (WAC) can be subdivided broadly into two major categories: water immersion (WI), characterized by suction removal of the infused water predominantly during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy, and water exchange (WE), characterized by suction removal of infused water predominantly during the insertion phase of colonoscopy. In some reports WE appeared to be superior to both WI and air insufflation colonoscopy (AI) in terms of pain reduction and adenoma detection, particularly for \<10 mm adenomas in the proximal colon. In this multicenter, double-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) we test the hypothesis that that WE, compared to AI and WI, will enhance overall Adenoma Detection Rate (ADR) in CRC screening patients. Confirmation of the primary hypothesis will provide evidence that WE enhances the quality of screening colonoscopy. We also hypothesize that WE may be more effective in detecting proximal colon adenomas than WI and AI, particularly \<10 mm adenomas, thus increasing proximal colon ADR and proximal colon ADR \<10 mm. Confirmation of secondary hypotheses will provide justification for further testing that WE may provide a strategy to improve prevention of colorectal cancer by increasing detection of adenomas in screening colonoscopy. Unlike previous reports of single colonoscopist studies, the insertion and withdrawal phases of colonoscopy will be done by different investigators. The second investigator will be blinded to the method used to insert the instrument, thus eliminating possible bias about procedure related issues. Several secondary outcomes will also be analysed.
Insufflation of the colon, usually with room air, is necessary to distend the lumen for exploration. Carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation instead of room air insufflation (AI) has been shown to decrease symptoms of abdominal pain or discomfort during the procedure and particularly during the following 24 hours. CO2 is is rapidly absorbed by the intestinal mucosa and exhaled through respiration. AI colonoscopy has usually been the reference standard to compare colonoscopy using CO2 insufflation. In two recent articles AI was compared to either CO2 insufflation and Water-aided colonoscopy (WAC), which entails infusion of water to facilitate insertion to the cecum. WAC can be categorized broadly in Water Immersion (WI) and Water Exchange (WE). In WI water is infused during the insertion phase of colonoscopy, with removal of infused water predominantly during withdrawal. Occasional use of insufflation may be allowed. WE entails complete exclusion of insufflation, removal of residual colonic air pockets and feces, and suction of infused water predominantly during insertion to minimize distention. During the withdrawal phase insufflation is used to distend the colonic lumen. In the WAC arms of the two mentioned articles the insertion method used was WI, with infusion of water at room temperature or at 37°C. During withdrawal, air insufflation or either air or CO2 insufflation were employed. Compared to AI, CO2 insufflation and WI (using room air insufflation or CO2 insufflation during withdrawal) were effective in both studies in decreasing sedation requirement, pain and tolerance scores, with patients' higher willingness to repeat the procedure. Until now no direct comparison has been made within a single study about pain score during colonoscopy using AI, CO2 insufflation, WI/CO2, WE/CO2, WI/AI and WE/AI. In this study we test the hypothesis that, compared to AI, CO2 insufflation and WAC/CO2-AI methods will decrease pain score during colonoscopy, with reduction of sedation requirement, and that WE will achieve the best result. This comparative study has also the aim to test the respective peculiarities of each method.
The objective of this study is to determine the optimal withdrawal time for colonoscopy. A 6-minute withdrawal time is currently the standard of care but has only been evaluated in an observational fashion. The investigators believe that this should be validated in a standardized fashion. If the benefits of a 6 minute withdrawal are proven in this study (ie a low polyp/adenoma miss rate and a high polyp/adenoma detection rate), then this will support widespread adoption of a 6 minute withdrawal as the standard of care. This in turn may decrease the occurence of 'interval colon cancers', which are early colon cancers arising in subjects despite their having undergone colonoscopy. Our hypothesis is that the polyp/adenoma detection rate will be unacceptably low and the polyp/adenoma miss rate will be unacceptably high in the 3-minute withdrawal group when compared to the 6-minute withdrawal group.
Water-aided method for colonoscopy can be broadly subdivided into two major categories. Water Immersion (WI), characterized by suction removal of the infused water predominantly during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy, and Water Exchange (WE), characterized by suction removal of infused water predominantly during the insertion phase of colonoscopy. Several studies showed that WE significantly reduces pain compared to WI and colonoscopy with traditional air insufflation (AI), increases the number of unsedated procedures and adenoma detection rate (ADR), in particular proximal ADR. This randomized controlled trial will be a direct comparison of Air Insufflation, Water Immersion and Water Exchange to test the hypothesis that WAC (particularly WE) would significantly decrease pain score during colonoscopy in diagnostic patients. Several other secondary outcomes will also be analyzed.
Water-aided method for colonoscopy can be broadly subdivided into two major categories. Water Immersion (WI), characterized by suction removal of the infused water predominantly during the withdrawal phase of colonoscopy, and Water Exchange (WE), characterized by suction removal of infused water predominantly during the insertion phase of colonoscopy. Several studies showed that WE significantly reduces pain compared to WI and colonoscopy with traditional air insufflation (AI), increases the number of unsedated procedures and adenoma detection rate (ADR), in particular proximal ADR. This randomized controlled trial will be a direct comparison of Air Insufflation, Water Immersion and Water Exchange to test the hypothesis that WAC (particularly WE) would significantly decrease pain score during colonoscopy in average-risk screening patients. Several other secondary outcomes will also be analyzed.
Hypothesis: Novice trainees will achieve significantly higher clinical competence and patient satisfaction scores with the use of warm water infusion method when compared with traditional air insufflation Primary outcome: adenoma detection rate Secondary outcomes: (1) independent cecal intubation rate, (2) trainer assessment of trainee's colonoscopy skills, (3) trainee's assessment of clinical confidence, (4) procedural medication requirement, (5) patient pain level during procedure, (6) patient satisfaction at procedure completion, and (7) patient willingness to repeat procedure' Specific Aim: To demonstrate the stated hypothesis via above outcome measures. The long term goal is to provide evidence to influence other training institutions to consider education in the warm water infusion method'
Effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relies on early identification and removal of both polypoid and non-polypoid lesions with neoplastic potential. The investigators hypothesize that an intensive training program designed to enhance both recognition and classification of lesions with neoplastic potential, will result in an increase in non-polypoid adenoma detection in addition to and independent of an increase in overall adenoma detection rates.
Hypothesis-- Nurse observation in addition to the colonoscopist while withdrawing the colonoscope from the cecum leads to a greater adenoma detection rate. Methods- Patients presenting for screening colonoscopy are randomized to nurse observation or usual practice. Risk factors for adenoma development and the adenoma detection rate in each group will be evaluated.
An observational prospective will be conducted to determine the detection rate of serrated adenoma during screening colonoscopy at our institution. Additionally, the variability of serrated adenoma detection among endoscopists will be evaluated and the characteristics of serrated adenomas will be described.
The Third Eye® Retroscope® is a device that can be inserted through the instrument channel of a standard colonoscope to provide an additional, retrograde (or backward) view that reveals areas behind folds and flexures in the colon, and might detect additional polyps that cannot be seen with the colonoscope alone. Patients who participate as subjects in the study will undergo two complete colonoscopy procedures, a standard colonoscopy and a colonoscopy in which a Third Eye Retroscope is used along with the same colonoscope. Half of the patients will have the standard colonoscopy first followed by the Third Eye colonoscopy, and the other half will have the Third Eye procedure first. Results from the two groups will be analyzed and compared to determine the effectiveness of the Third Eye Retroscope for detecting additional adenomas and other polyps compared with the standard colonoscope alone.