Clinical Endoscopy

Review

Can Computed Tomography Colonography Replace Optical Colonoscopy in Detecting Colorectal Lesions?: State of the Art: Alessia Chini, Michele Manigrasso, Grazia Cantore, Rosa Maione, Marco Milone, Francesco Maione, Giovanni Domenico De Palma; Clin Endosc 2022;55(2):183-190. Published online February 24, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2021.254

Colorectal cancer is an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Optical colonoscopy (OC) is widely accepted as the reference standard for the screening of colorectal polyps and cancers, and computed tomography colonography (CTC) is a valid alternative to OC. The purpose of this review was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of OC and CTC for colorectal lesions. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and 18 articles were included. CTC has emerged in recent years as a potential screening examination with high accuracy for the detection of colorectal lesions. However, the clinical application of CTC as a screening technique is limited because it is highly dependent on the size of the lesions and has poor performance in detecting individual lesions <5 mm or flat lesions, which, although rarely, can have a malignant potential.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Multi-view orientational attention network combining point-based affinity for polyp segmentation
Yan Liu, Yan Yang, Yongquan Jiang, Zhuyang Xie
Expert Systems with Applications.2024; 249: 123663. CrossRef
The Influence of Mechanical Bowel Preparation on Volatile Organic Compounds for the Detection of Gastrointestinal Disease—A Systematic Review
Ashwin Krishnamoorthy, Subashini Chandrapalan, Sofie Bosch, Ayman Bannaga, Nanne K.H. De Boer, Tim G.J. De Meij, Marcis Leja, George B. Hanna, Nicoletta De Vietro, Donato Altomare, Ramesh P. Arasaradnam
Sensors.2023; 23(3): 1377. CrossRef
The Detection of Colorectal Cancer through Machine Learning-Based Breath Sensor Analysis
Inese Poļaka, Linda Mežmale, Linda Anarkulova, Elīna Kononova, Ilona Vilkoite, Viktors Veliks, Anna Marija Ļeščinska, Ilmārs Stonāns, Andrejs Pčolkins, Ivars Tolmanis, Gidi Shani, Hossam Haick, Jan Mitrovics, Johannes Glöckler, Boris Mizaikoff, Mārcis Lej
Diagnostics.2023; 13(21): 3355. CrossRef

4,623 View
257 Download
4 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Original Articles

Artificial Intelligence-Based Colorectal Polyp Histology Prediction by Using Narrow-Band Image-Magnifying Colonoscopy: Istvan Racz, Andras Horvath, Noemi Kranitz, Gyongyi Kiss, Henriett Regoczi, Zoltan Horvath; Clin Endosc 2022;55(1):113-121. Published online September 23, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2021.149

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: We have been developing artificial intelligence based polyp histology prediction (AIPHP) method to classify Narrow Band Imaging (NBI) magnifying colonoscopy images to predict the hyperplastic or neoplastic histology of polyps. Our aim was to analyze the accuracy of AIPHP and narrow-band imaging international colorectal endoscopic (NICE) classification based histology predictions and also to compare the results of the two methods.
Methods
We studied 373 colorectal polyp samples taken by polypectomy from 279 patients. The documented NBI still images were analyzed by the AIPHP method and by the NICE classification parallel. The AIPHP software was created by machine learning method. The software measures five geometrical and color features on the endoscopic image.
Results
The accuracy of AIPHP was 86.6% (323/373) in total of polyps. We compared the AIPHP accuracy results for diminutive and non-diminutive polyps (82.1% vs. 92.2%; p=0.0032). The accuracy of the hyperplastic histology prediction was significantly better by NICE compared to AIPHP method both in the diminutive polyps (n=207) (95.2% vs. 82.1%) (p<0.001) and also in all evaluated polyps (n=373) (97.1% vs. 86.6%) (p<0.001)
Conclusions
Our artificial intelligence based polyp histology prediction software could predict histology with high accuracy only in the large size polyp subgroup.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Colon polyps: updates in classification and management
David Dornblaser, Sigird Young, Aasma Shaukat
Current Opinion in Gastroenterology.2024; 40(1): 14. CrossRef
Employing deep learning for predicting the thermal properties of water and nano-encapsulated phase change material
Saihua Xu, Ali Basem, Hasan A Al-Asadi, Rishabh Chaturvedi, Gulrux Daminova, Yasser Fouad, Dheyaa J Jasim, Javid Alhoee
International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies.2024; 19: 1453. CrossRef
Endoscopic Artificial Intelligence for Image Analysis in Gastrointestinal Neoplasms
Ryosuke Kikuchi, Kazuaki Okamoto, Tsuyoshi Ozawa, Junichi Shibata, Soichiro Ishihara, Tomohiro Tada
Digestion.2024; 105(6): 419. CrossRef
Detecting colorectal lesions with image-enhanced endoscopy: an updated review from clinical trials
Mizuki Nagai, Sho Suzuki, Yohei Minato, Fumiaki Ishibashi, Kentaro Mochida, Ken Ohata, Tetsuo Morishita
Clinical Endoscopy.2023; 56(5): 553. CrossRef
AI-powered medical devices for practical clinicians including the diagnosis of colorectal polyps
Donghwan Kim, Eunsun Kim
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2023; 66(11): 658. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence-Based Colorectal Polyp Histology Prediction: High Accuracy in Larger Polyps
Naoki Muguruma, Tetsuji Takayama
Clinical Endoscopy.2022; 55(1): 45. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-based colorectal polyp histology prediction using narrow-band image-magnifying colonoscopy: a stepping stone for clinical practice
Ji Young Chang
Clinical Endoscopy.2022; 55(5): 699. CrossRef
Response to Artificial intelligence-based colorectal polyp histology prediction using narrow-band image-magnifying colonoscopy: a stepping stone for clinical practice
Istvan Racz, Andras Horvath, Zoltán Horvath
Clinical Endoscopy.2022; 55(5): 701. CrossRef

5,161 View
207 Download
8 Web of Science
8 Crossref

Is Submucosal Injection Helpful in Cold Snare Polypectomy for Small Colorectal Polyps?: Ji Hyun Song, Shai Friedland; Clin Endosc 2021;54(3):397-403. Published online February 9, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2020.226

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is an effective method of polyp removal for small colorectal polyps. However, the effect of submucosal injection in cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection (CS-EMR) for small polyps is unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of submucosal injection in CS-EMR for small polyps.
Methods
Between 2018 and 2019, 100 consecutive small colorectal polyps (5–10 mm) were identified in 58 patients. The first 50 consecutive polyps were removed by CS-EMR, and the remaining 50 were removed by CSP. Demographic data, clinical data, endoscopic findings, procedure times, complication rates, and pathology data were collected.
Results
No difference in the complete resection rate was observed between the CS-EMR and CSP groups. A total of 9 polyps showed post-polypectomy bleeding (7 had immediate bleeding, 1 had delayed bleeding, and 1 had both immediate and delayed bleeding). No difference in the bleeding rate was observed between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, warfarin (odds ratio [OR], 42.334; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.006–1,781.758) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (OR, 35.244; 95% CI, 3.853–322.397) showed a significantly increased risk of bleeding.
Conclusions
The effect of submucosal injection in CSP was not significant for small colorectal polyps.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Cold sub-mucosal injection versus traditional cold snare polypectomy for diminutive and small colorectal polyps: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Yong-Cai Lv, Quan Dong, Yan-Hua Yao, Jing-Jing Lei
Indian Journal of Gastroenterology.2024; 43(6): 1111. CrossRef
Colorectal cold snare polypectomy: Current standard technique and future perspectives
Fumiaki Ishibashi, Sho Suzuki, Mizuki Nagai, Kentaro Mochida, Tetsuo Morishita
Digestive Endoscopy.2023; 35(3): 278. CrossRef
The efficacy and safety of cold snare polypectomy with submucosal injection for the removal of polyps less than 20 mm in size: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Zheng Liang, Yongqiu Wei, Shutian Zhang, Peng Li
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2023; 38(11): 1892. CrossRef
Impact of Submucosal Saline Injection During Cold Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps Sized 3–9 mm: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Yi Mou, Liansong Ye, Xiaobo Qin, Rui Feng, Lifan Zhang, Qin Hu, Tingting Cao, Xinyue Zhou, Wu Wen, Chuanming Zhang, Zonghua Chen, Yi Liu, Zhimin Yang, Tao Huo, Fang Pan, Xuelian Li, Bing Hu
American Journal of Gastroenterology.2023; 118(10): 1848. CrossRef
Cold resection for colorectal polyps: where we are and where we are going?
Antonio Capogreco, Ludovico Alfarone, Davide Massimi, Alessandro Repici
Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology.2023; 17(7): 719. CrossRef
Cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection for colon polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Mohamed Abdallah, Khalid Ahmed, Daniyal Abbas, Mouhand F. H. Mohamed, Gaurav Suryawanshi, Nicholas McDonald, Natalie Wilson, Shifa Umar, Aasma Shaukat, Mohammad Bilal
Endoscopy.2023; 55(12): 1083. CrossRef
Endoscopic treatment of colorectal polyps and early colorectal cancer
Yunho Jung
Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2023; 66(11): 642. CrossRef

4,967 View
181 Download
8 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Review

Should We Resect and Discard Low Risk Diminutive Colon Polyps: Pujan Kandel, Michael B. Wallace; Clin Endosc 2019;52(3):239-246. Published online January 21, 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2018.136

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Diminutive colorectal polyps <5 mm are very common and almost universally benign. The current strategy of resection with histological confirmation of all colorectal polyps is costly and may increase the risk of colonoscopy. Accurate, optical diagnosis without histology can be achieved with currently available endoscopic technologies. The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable endoscopic Innovations supports strategies for optical diagnosis of small non neoplastic polyps as long as two criteria are met. For hyperplastic appearing polyps <5 mm in recto-sigmoid colon, the negative predictive value should be at least 90%. For diminutive low grade adenomatous appearing polyps, a resect and discard strategy should be sufficiently accurate such that post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations based on the optical diagnosis, agree with a histologically diagnosis at least 90% of the time. Although the resect and discard as well as diagnose and leave behind approach has major benefits with regard to both safety and cost, it has yet to be used widely in practice. To fully implement such as strategy, there is a need for better-quality training, quality assurance, and patient acceptance. In the article, we will review the current state of the science on optical diagnose of colorectal polyps and its implications for colonoscopy practice.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The role of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy
Hyun Jae Kim, Nasim Parsa, Michael F. Byrne
Seminars in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2024; 35(1): 101007. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence for characterization of colorectal polyps: Prospective multicenter study
Glenn De Lange, Victor Prouvost, Gabriel Rahmi, Geoffroy Vanbiervliet, Catherine Le Berre, Sahar Mack, Thibaud Koessler, Emmanuel Coron
Endoscopy International Open.2024; 12(03): E413. CrossRef
Ecogastroenterology: cultivating sustainable clinical excellence in an environmentally conscious landscape
Kassem Sharif, Enrique Rodriguez de Santiago, Paula David, Arnon Afek, Ian M Gralnek, Shomron Ben-Horin, Adi Lahat
The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology.2024; 9(6): 550. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence in Coloproctology: A Review of Emerging Technologies and Clinical Applications
Joana Mota, Maria João Almeida, Miguel Martins, Francisco Mendes, Pedro Cardoso, João Afonso, Tiago Ribeiro, João Ferreira, Filipa Fonseca, Manuel Limbert, Susana Lopes, Guilherme Macedo, Fernando Castro Poças, Miguel Mascarenhas
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2024; 13(19): 5842. CrossRef
Rationalising the use of specimen pots following colorectal polypectomy: a small step towards greener endoscopy
Karl King Yong, Yun He, Hoi Ching Annie Cheung, Ramya Sriskandarajah, William Jenkins, Robert Goldin, Sabina Beg
Frontline Gastroenterology.2023; 14(4): 295. CrossRef
Measurements, Algorithms, and Presentations of Reality: Framing Interactions with AI-Enabled Decision Support
Niels van Berkel, Maura Bellio, Mikael B. Skov, Ann Blandford
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.2023; 30(2): 1. CrossRef
Real-World Validation of a Computer-Aided Diagnosis System for Prediction of Polyp Histology in Colonoscopy: A Prospective Multicenter Study
James Weiquan Li, Clement Chun Ho Wu, Jonathan Wei Jie Lee, Raymond Liang, Gwyneth Shook Ting Soon, Lai Mun Wang, Xuan Han Koh, Calvin Jianyi Koh, Wei Da Chew, Kenneth Weicong Lin, Mann Yie Thian, Ronnie Matthew, Guowei Kim, Christopher Jen Lock Khor, Kwo
American Journal of Gastroenterology.2023; 118(8): 1353. CrossRef
The Utility of Narrow-Band Imaging International Colorectal Endoscopic Classification in Predicting the Histologies of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps Using I-Scan Optical Enhancement: A Prospective Study
Yeo Wool Kang, Jong Hoon Lee, Jong Yoon Lee
Diagnostics.2023; 13(16): 2720. CrossRef
Optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using novel blue light imaging classification among trainee endoscopists
Christopher Koehn, Douglas K. Rex, Jimmy Allen, Umer Bhatti, Indira Bhavsar‐Burke, Viveksandeep Thoguluva Chandrasekar, Abhishek Challa, Abhiram Duvvuri, Lara Dakhoul, John Ha, Nour Hamade, S. Bradley Hicks, Claire Jansson‐Knodell, Edward Krajicek, Shanke
Digestive Endoscopy.2022; 34(1): 191. CrossRef
Too Good to Be True? Evaluation of Colonoscopy Sensitivity Assumptions Used in Policy Models
Carolyn M. Rutter, Pedro Nascimento de Lima, Jeffrey K. Lee, Jonathan Ozik
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.2022; 31(4): 775. CrossRef
Non-optical polyp-based resect and discard strategy: A prospective clinical study
Mahsa Taghiakbari, Celia Hammar, Mira Frenn, Roupen Djinbachian, Heiko Pohl, Erik Deslandres, Simon Bouchard, Mickael Bouin, Daniel von Renteln
World Journal of Gastroenterology.2022; 28(19): 2137. CrossRef
No-Code Platform-Based Deep-Learning Models for Prediction of Colorectal Polyp Histology from White-Light Endoscopy Images: Development and Performance Verification
Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang, Jae Jun Lee, Seung In Seo, Young Joo Yang, Gwang Ho Baik, Jong Wook Kim
Journal of Personalized Medicine.2022; 12(6): 963. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: a narrative review of current data and clinical applications
JW Li, LM Wang, TL Ang
Singapore Medical Journal.2022; 63(3): 118. CrossRef
Impact of the Volume and Distribution of Training Datasets in the Development of Deep-Learning Models for the Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps in Endoscopy Images
Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang, Jae Jun Lee, Young Joo Yang, Gwang Ho Baik
Journal of Personalized Medicine.2022; 12(9): 1361. CrossRef
How to safely apply a 'Resect and Discard' policy for small colorectal polyps–real‐world data comparing endoscopic polyp evaluation and subsequent histological outcome
Georgios Marinopoulos, Maja Kopczynska, Robert Clark, Nadeem Sarwar, Yeng Ang, Arash Assadsangabi
GastroHep.2021; 3(1): 12. CrossRef
Characterization of Optical Coherence Tomography Images for Colon Lesion Differentiation under Deep Learning
Cristina L. Saratxaga, Jorge Bote, Juan F. Ortega-Morán, Artzai Picón, Elena Terradillos, Nagore Arbide del Río, Nagore Andraka, Estibaliz Garrote, Olga M. Conde
Applied Sciences.2021; 11(7): 3119. CrossRef
Clinical validation of the SIMPLE classification for optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps
Ahmed Amine Alaoui, Kussil Oumedjbeur, Roupen Djinbachian, Étienne Marchand, Paola N. Marques, Mickael Bouin, Simon Bouchard, Daniel von Renteln
Endoscopy International Open.2021; 09(05): E684. CrossRef
Colonoscopy and artificial intelligence: Bridging the gap or a gap needing to be bridged?
Tiing Leong Ang, James Weiquan Li
Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2021; 2(2): 36. CrossRef
RNA-sequencing identification and validation of genes differentially expressed in high-risk adenoma, advanced colorectal cancer, and normal controls
Namjoo Kim, Jeong-An Gim, Beom Jae Lee, Byung il Choi, Seung Bin Park, Hee Sook Yoon, Sang Hee Kang, Seung Han Kim, Moon Kyung Joo, Jong-Jae Park, Chungyeul Kim, Han-Kyeom Kim
Functional & Integrative Genomics.2021; 21(3-4): 513. CrossRef
Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps in Endoscopic Images: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
Chang Seok Bang, Jae Jun Lee, Gwang Ho Baik
Journal of Medical Internet Research.2021; 23(8): e29682. CrossRef
Automatic image and text-based description for colorectal polyps using BASIC classification
Roger Fonollà, Quirine E.W. van der Zander, Ramon M. Schreuder, Sharmila Subramaniam, Pradeep Bhandari, Ad A.M. Masclee, Erik J. Schoon, Fons van der Sommen, Peter H.N. de With
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine.2021; 121: 102178. CrossRef
Editors' Choice of Noteworthy Clinical Endoscopy Publications in the First Decade
Gwang Ha Kim, Kwang An Kwon, Do Hyun Park, Jimin Han
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(5): 633. CrossRef
Diagnosis and Treatment of Diminutive Polyps in the Colon
Iness Soltani, Daniel von Renteln
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology.2020; 18(2): 175. CrossRef
Colon capsule endoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial
Lasse Kaalby, Ulrik Deding, Morten Kobaek-Larsen, Anne-Line Volden Havshoi, Erik Zimmermann-Nielsen, Marianne Kirstine Thygesen, Rasmus Kroijer, Thomas Bjørsum-Meyer, Gunnar Baatrup
BMJ Open Gastroenterology.2020; 7(1): e000411. CrossRef
A CNN CADx System for Multimodal Classification of Colorectal Polyps Combining WL, BLI, and LCI Modalities
Roger Fonollà, Quirine E. W. van der Zander, Ramon M. Schreuder, Ad A. M. Masclee, Erik J. Schoon, Fons van der Sommen, Peter H. N. de With
Applied Sciences.2020; 10(15): 5040. CrossRef
UEG Week 2019 Poster Presentations

United European Gastroenterology Journal.2019; 7(S8): 189. CrossRef

10,954 View
297 Download
24 Web of Science
26 Crossref

Original Articles

Endoscopic Mucosal Resection with Circumferential Incision for the Treatment of Large Sessile Polyps and Laterally Spreading Tumors of the Colorectum: Young Mi Hong, Hyung Wook Kim, Su Bum Park, Cheol Woong Choi, Dae Hwan Kang; Clin Endosc 2015;48(1):52-58. Published online January 31, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2015.48.1.52

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background/Aims

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard treatment for colorectal polyps such as adenomas and early cancers with no risk of lymph node metastasis. However, endoscopic resection of large colorectal polyps (≥20 mm diameter) is difficult to perform. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of EMR with circumferential incision (EMR-CI) for the resection of large sessile polyps (Is) and laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) in the colorectum.

Methods

Between February 2009 and March 2011, we resected 80 large colorectal polyps by EMR-CI. We retrospectively investigated the en bloc resection rate, histologic complete resection rate, recurrence rate, and complications.

Results

The median polyp size was approximately 25 mm (range, 20 to 50), and the morphologic types included Is (13 cases), LST-granular (37 cases), and LST-nongranular (30 cases). The en bloc and complete histologic resection rates were 66.3% and 45.0%, respectively. The recurrence rate was 0% (median follow-up duration, 23 months), and perforation occurred in five cases (6.3%).

Conclusions

EMR-CI is an effective treatment modality for 20 to 30 mm-sized colorectal polyps, and may be considered as a second line therapeutic option if ESD is difficult.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection as a salvage option for difficult colorectal conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection
Shin Morimoto, Hidenori Tanaka, Yudai Takehara, Noriko Yamamoto, Fumiaki Tanino, Yuki Kamigaichi, Ken Yamashita, Hidehiko Takigawa, Ryo Yuge, Yuji Urabe, Shiro Oka
Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(1): 222. CrossRef
Endoscopic resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: current standards of treatment
Mahsa Taghiakbari, Dong Hyun Danny Kim, Roupen Djinbachian, Daniel von Renteln
eGastroenterology.2024; 2(2): e100025. CrossRef
Hybrid Endoscopic Resection With Endo-knife and Snare for Colorectal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Shinji Yoshii, Takefumi Kikuchi, Yuki Hayashi, Masahiro Nojima, Hiro-o Yamano, Hiroshi Nakase
Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2023; 25(2): 135. CrossRef
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection, Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Management of Rectal and Anorectal Lesions: A Narrative Review
Pedro Moreira, Pedro Cardoso, Guilherme Macedo, João Santos-Antunes
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2023; 12(14): 4777. CrossRef
Indications and outcomes of colorectal hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection: a large multicenter 10-year study
Yuki Okamoto, Shiro Oka, Shinji Tanaka, Shinji Nagata, Masaki Kunihiro, Toshio Kuwai, Yuko Hiraga, Seiji Onogawa, Takeshi Mizumoto, Hideharu Okanobu, Morihisa Akagi, Kazuaki Chayama
Surgical Endoscopy.2022; 36(3): 1894. CrossRef
Comparison of precutting endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for large (20–30 mm) flat colorectal lesions
Chang Kyo Oh, Young Wook Cho, In Hyoung Choi, Han Hee Lee, Chul‐Hyun Lim, Jin Su Kim, Bo‐In Lee, Young‐Seok Cho
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 37(3): 568. CrossRef
Cap-assisted EMR versus standard inject and cut EMR for treatment of large colonic laterally spreading tumors: a randomized multicenter study (with videos)
Massimo Conio, Raffaele Manta, Rosa Angela Filiberti, Todd H. Baron, Luigi Pasquale, Mario Marini, Antonella De Ceglie
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2022; 96(5): 829. CrossRef
Endoscopic techniques to reduce recurrence rates after colorectal EMR: systematic review and meta-analysis
Gijs Kemper, Ayla S. Turan, Erik J. Schoon, Ruud W. M. Schrauwen, Ludger S. M. Epping, Christian Gerges, Torsten Beyna, Horst Neuhaus, Ufuk Gündug, Peter D. Siersema, Erwin J. M. van Geenen
Surgical Endoscopy.2021; 35(10): 5422. CrossRef
Indications and outcomes of endoscopic resection for non-pedunculated colorectal lesions: A narrative review
Endrit Shahini, Diogo Libânio, Giacomo Lo Secco, Antonio Pisani, Alberto Arezzo
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2021; 13(8): 275. CrossRef
Endoscopic mucosal resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal laterally spreading tumors: a meta-analysis
Hongjing Zhao, Jie Yin, Cuiying Ji, Xin Wang, Na Wang
Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as a rescue treatment in difficult colorectal ESD cases
Koichi Okamoto, Naoki Muguruma, Kaizo Kagemoto, Yasuhiro Mitsui, Daisaku Fujimoto, Shinji Kitamura, Tetsuo Kimura, Masahiro Sogabe, Hiroshi Miyamoto, Tetsuji Takayama
Digestive Endoscopy.2017; 29(S2): 45. CrossRef
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection with Circumferential Mucosal Incision for Colorectal Neoplasms: Comparison with Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and between Two Endoscopists with Different Experiences
Dong-Hoon Yang, Min-Seob Kwak, Sang Hyoung Park, Byong Duk Ye, Jeong-Sik Byeon, Seung-Jae Myung, Suk-Kyun Yang, Hyun Gun Kim, Shai Friedland
Clinical Endoscopy.2017; 50(4): 379. CrossRef
Local recurrence and subsequent endoscopic treatment after endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection with or without precutting in the colorectum
Myeongsook Seo, Eun Mi Song, Gwang Un Kim, Sung Wook Hwang, Sang Hyoung Park, Dong-Hoon Yang, Kyung-Jo Kim, Byong Duk Ye, Seung-Jae Myung, Suk-Kyun Yang, Jeong-Sik Byeon
Intestinal Research.2017; 15(4): 502. CrossRef
How to deal with large colorectal polyps
Selvi Thirumurthi, Gottumukkala S. Raju
Current Opinion in Gastroenterology.2016; 32(1): 26. CrossRef
Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: A systematic review
Antonella De Ceglie, Cesare Hassan, Benedetto Mangiavillano, Takahisa Matsuda, Yutaka Saito, Lorenzo Ridola, Pradeep Bhandari, Federica Boeri, Massimo Conio
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology.2016; 104: 138. CrossRef
Should antibiotics be administered after endoscopic mucosalresection in patients with colon polyps?
Zhimeng SHI, Hui QIU, Huangang LIU, Honggang YU
TURKISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES.2016; 46: 1486. CrossRef
Endoscopic Approach for Superficial Colorectal Neoplasms
Jun-feng Xu, Lang Yang, Peng Jin, Jian-qiu Sheng
Gastrointestinal Tumors.2016; 3(2): 69. CrossRef
Many Options to Manage Laterally Spreading Tumors
Dong Kyung Chang
Clinical Endoscopy.2015; 48(1): 4. CrossRef

10,193 View
126 Download
22 Web of Science
18 Crossref

Diagnostic Yield and Therapeutic Impact of Rectal Retroflexion: A Prospective, Single-Blind Study Conducted in Three Centers: Félix Téllez-Ávila, Josué Barahona-Garrido, Sandra García-Osogobio, Gustavo López-Arce, Jesús Camacho-Escobedo, Angela Saúl, Salvador Herrera-Gómez, Javier Elizondo-Rivera, Rafael Barreto-Zúñiga; Clin Endosc 2014;47(1):79-83. Published online January 24, 2014; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2014.47.1.79

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background/Aims

No clear data have been established and validated regarding whether rectal retroflexion has an important and therapeutic impact. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield and therapeutic impact of rectal retroflexion compared with straight view examination.

Methods

A prospective single-blind study was conducted. Consecutive patients evaluated between October 2011 and April 2012 were included.

Results

A total of 934 patients (542 women, 58%) were included. The mean age was 57.4±14.8 years. Retroflexion was successful in 917 patients (98.2%). Distinct lesions in the anorectal area were detected in 32 patients (3.4%), of which 10 (1%) were identified only on retroflex view and 22 (2.4%) on both straight and retroflex views. Of the 32 identified lesions, 16 (50%) were polyps, nine (28.1%) were angiodysplasias, six (18.8%) were ulcers, and one (3.1%) was a flat lesion. All 10 patients (1%) in whom lesions were detected only by rectal retroflexion showed a therapeutic impact.

Conclusions

Rectal retroflexion has minimal diagnostic yield and therapeutic impact. However, its low rate of major complications and the possibility of detecting lesions undetectable by straight viewing justify its use.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Consenso de endoscopia en enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal de la Organización Panamericana de Crohn y Colitis (PANCCO) y la Sociedad Interamericana de endoscopia (SIED)
Viviana Parra-Izquierdo, Fabio Leonel Gil-Parada, Fabian Juliao-Baños, Carolina Pavez-Ovalle, William Otero-Regino, Juan Sebastian Frías-Ordoñez, Asadur Tchekmedyian, Juan Eloy Paredes Mendez, Rodrigo Dorelo, Kenneth Ernest-Suarez, Marcos Leites Madera, M
Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Unlocking quality in endoscopic mucosal resection
Eoin Keating, Jan Leyden, Donal B O'Connor, Conor Lahiff
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2023; 15(5): 338. CrossRef
Detection of colorectal lesions during colonoscopy
Hiroaki Ikematsu, Tatsuro Murano, Kensuke Shinmura
DEN Open.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Colonoscopy screening and surveillance guidelines
Yutaka Saito, Shiro Oka, Takuji Kawamura, Ryo Shimoda, Masau Sekiguchi, Naoto Tamai, Kinichi Hotta, Takahisa Matsuda, Masashi Misawa, Shinji Tanaka, Yosuke Iriguchi, Ryoichi Nozaki, Hironori Yamamoto, Masahiro Yoshida, Kazuma Fujimoto, Haruhiro Inoue
Digestive Endoscopy.2021; 33(4): 486. CrossRef
À s’y méprendre !
N. Musquer
Côlon & Rectum.2018; 12(4): 247. CrossRef
Strategies to Increase Adenoma Detection Rates
Eelco C. Brand, Michael B. Wallace
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology.2017; 15(1): 184. CrossRef
Colorectal Cancer Screening
Jesse Samuel Moore, Tess Hannah Aulet
Surgical Clinics of North America.2017; 97(3): 487. CrossRef
Right-sided adenoma detection with retroflexion versus forward-view colonoscopy
Sujievvan Chandran, Frank Parker, Rhys Vaughan, Brent Mitchell, Scott Fanning, Gregor Brown, Jenny Yu, Marios Efthymiou
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2015; 81(3): 608. CrossRef
Rectal Retroflexion during Colonoscopy: A Bridge over Troubled Water
Kwang An Kwon, Ki Baik Hahm
Clinical Endoscopy.2014; 47(1): 3. CrossRef
Colite kystique profonde localisée : une cause inhabituelle de formation polypoïde pectinéale
R. Ennaifer, M. Chiekh, H. Romdhane, N. Bel Hadj, A. Lahmar, H. Ben Nejma
Acta Endoscopica.2014; 44(6): 385. CrossRef

6,411 View
94 Download
7 Web of Science
10 Crossref

Focused Review Series: Optical Diagnosis and New Management Strategy of Colorectal Polyps

Introduction: What Are New Roles of Current Colonoscopy?: Hyung Wook Kim; Clin Endosc 2013;46(2):118-119. Published online March 31, 2013; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2013.46.2.118

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

The recent advances in endoscopic imaging technologies make great changes in the management of colorectal polyps. These changes include optical histologic diagnosis with high definition colonscopy, new management strategies such as resect and discard or do not resect, and differentiation of depth of submucosal invasion. In this focused review series, these new paradigms in management of colorectal polyps are discussed by three, world famous authors. First, Amit Rastogi explained optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyp with high definition colonoscopy using narrow band imaging. Second, Cesare Hassan explained new paradigms for colonoscopic management of diminutive colorectal polyps: resect and discard or do not resect. In the last, Shinji Tanaka described, in detail, endoscopic assessment of invasive colorectal cancer: slight vs. deep submucosal invasion. These focused review series introduce the new roles of current colonoscopy to readers and will help the readers to know how to use the new imaging technologies and paradigms in clinical practices.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Protein-Based Nanoplatform for Detection of Tumorigenic Polyps in the Colon Via Noninvasive Mucosal Routes
Chun-Chieh Chen, Mo A Baikoghli, R Holland Cheng
Pharmaceutical Patent Analyst.2021; 10(1): 13. CrossRef

4,817 View
39 Download
1 Crossref

The Pathological Differences of Colorectal Polyps Examined between the Use of a Forcep Biopsy and Endoscopic Resection: In Do Song, M.D., Jeong Wook Kim, M.D. and In Soo Oh, M.D.; Korean J Gastrointest Endosc 2008;37(1):14-19. Published online July 30, 2008

Abstract PDF: Background
/Aims: Complete excision of colorectal polyps is not always performed for various reasons. We investigated the discrepancy between the histologic findings of polyps excised by a forcep biopsy and histologic findings of polyps excised by endoscopic resection. Methods: We reviewed 137 patients with 206 colorectal polyps removed by endoscopic resection following forcep biopsies. Endoscopic records and pathological reports of patients were analyzed retrospectively. Results: The discrepancy of the histological type was 18.4% between the histologic findings of a polyp evaluated after a forceps biopsy and the histologic findings of a polyp evaluated after endoscopic resection. The discrepancy of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and a cancerous condition was 22.3% using the two procedures. A total of 15.5% of adenomas without HGD and 3.0% of hyperplasia in the forcep biopsy specimens were identified as adenomas with HGD in the resected specimens. A total of 18.2% of adenomas with HGD and 4.1% of adenomas without HGD in the forcep biopsy specimens were identified as adenomas with carcinoma in the resected specimens. The discrepancy rates of the histological type for HGD and a cancerous condition were high for penduculated polyps with a diameter of less than 10 mm and for polyps with a diameter of greater than 16 mm. Conclusions: Approaches to review the histology of an entire colorectal polyp should be performed, especially for polyps with an adenomatous histology and for polyps of the pedunculated form with a diameter of less than 10 mm and a diameter of greater than 16 mm after a forcep biopsy. (Korean J Gastrointest Endosc 2008;37:14-19)

1,826 View
10 Download

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search