| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Baldaque-Silva, Francisco, et al.
(författare)
-
Endoscopic assessment and grading of Barrett's esophagus using magnification endoscopy and narrow band imaging: Impact of structured learning and experience on the accuracy of the Amsterdam classification system
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1502-7708 .- 0036-5521. ; 48:2, s. 160-167
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective. Several classification systems have been launched to characterize Barrett's esophagus (BE) mucosa using magnification endoscopy with narrow band imaging (ME-NBI). The good accuracy and interobserver agreement described in the early reports were not reproduced subsequently. Recently, we reported somewhat higher accuracy of the classification developed by the Amsterdam group. The critical question then formulated was whether a structured learning program and the level of experience would affect the clinical usefulness of this classification. Material & methods: Two hundred and nine videos were prospectively captured from patients with BE using ME-NBI. From these, 70 were randomly selected and evaluated by six endoscopists with different levels of expertise, using a dedicated software application. First, an educational set was studied. Thereafter, the 70 test videos were evaluated. After classification of each video, the respective histological feedback was automatically given. Results. Within the learning process, there was a decrease in the time needed for evaluation and an increase in the certainty of prediction. The accuracy did not increase with the learning process. The sensitivity for detection of intestinal metaplasia ranged between 39% and 57%, and for neoplasia between 62% and 90%, irrespective of assessor's expertise. The kappa coefficient for the interobserver agreement ranged from 0.25 to 0.30 for intestinal metaplasia, and from 0.39 to 0.48 for neoplasia. Conclusion: Using a dedicated learning program, the ME-NBI Amsterdam classification system is suboptimal in terms of accuracy and inter- and intraobserver agreements. These results reiterate the questionable utility of corresponding classification system in clinical routine practice.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bednarska, Olga, et al.
(författare)
-
The Effectiveness and Tolerability of a Very Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy Compared to Low and High-Volume Polyethylene Glycol-Solutions in the Real-Life Setting
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Diagnostics. - Basel, Switzerland : MDPI. - 2075-4418. ; 12:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Adequate bowel cleansing is essential for high-quality colonoscopy. Recently, a new very low-volume 1 litre (1L) polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbate solution (ASC) has been introduced. Our aims were to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of this product compared to low-volume 2L PEG-ASC and high-volume 4L PEG solutions, in a real-life setting. In six endoscopy units in Sweden, outpatients undergoing colonoscopy were either prescribed solutions according to local routines, or the very low-volume solution in split dose regimen. Bowel cleansing effectiveness and patient experience was assessed using the Boston Bowel preparation scale (BBPS) and a patient questionnaire. A total of 1098 patients (mean age 58 years, 52% women) were included. All subsegment and the total BBPS scores were significantly greater for 1L PEG-ASC in comparison to other solutions (p < 0.05 for 1L PEG-ASC and 4L PEG for transverse and left colon, otherwise p < 0.001). Nausea was more frequent with 1L PEG-ASC compared to 2L PEG-ASC (p < 0.001) and vomiting were more often reported compared to both other solutions (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05 for 2L PEG-ASC and 4L PEG, respectively). Smell, taste, and total experience was better for 1L PEG-ASC compared to 4L PEG (p < 0.001), and similar compared to the 2L PEG-ASC. In conclusion, 1L PEG-ASC leads to better bowel cleansing compared to 2L PEG-ASC or 4L PEG products, with similar or greater patient satisfaction.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Burnand, B, et al.
(författare)
-
Use, appropriateness, and diagnostic yield of screening colonoscopy: an international observational study (EPAGE)
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1097-6779 .- 0016-5107. ; 63:7, s. 1018-1026
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Abstract in UndeterminedBackgroundScreening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to decrease mortality.ObjectiveTo examine determinants associated with having (1) a screening colonoscopy, (2) an appropriate indication for screening, and (3) a significant diagnosis at screening.DesignProspective observational study.SettingTwenty-one endoscopy centers from 11 countries.PatientsAsymptomatic patients who underwent a colonoscopy for the purpose of detecting CRC and who did not have a history of polyps or CRC, a lesion observed at a recent barium enema or sigmoidoscopy, or a recent positive fecal occult blood test.InterventionScreening colonoscopy.Main Outcome MeasurementsAppropriateness according to the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) criteria and significant diagnoses (cancer, adenomatous polyps, new diagnoses of inflammatory bowel disease, angiodysplasia).ResultsOf 5069 colonoscopies, 561 (11%) were performed for screening purposes. Patients were more likely to have a screening colonoscopy if they were aged 45 to 54 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.60-3.99). Screening colonoscopies were appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate in 26%, 60%, and 14% of cases, respectively. Eighty-one significant diagnoses were made, including 4 cancers. Significant diagnoses were more often made for uncertain/appropriate indications (OR 3.20, 95% CI 1.12-9.17) than for inappropriate indications.LimitationsAlthough data completeness was asked of all centers, it is possible that not all consecutive patients were included. Participating centers were a convenience sample and thus may not be representative.ConclusionsAbout 1 of 10 colonoscopies were performed for screening, preferentially in middle-aged individuals. A higher diagnostic yield in uncertain/appropriate indications suggests that the use of appropriateness criteria may enhance the efficient use of colonoscopy for screening.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ciuti, Gastone, et al.
(författare)
-
Frontiers of robotic colonoscopy : A comprehensive review of robotic colonoscopes and technologies
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Medicine. - : MDPI AG. - 2077-0383. ; 9:6
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Flexible colonoscopy remains the prime mean of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and the gold standard of all population-based screening pathways around the world. Almost 60% of CRC deaths could be prevented with screening. However, colonoscopy attendance rates are affected by discomfort, fear of pain and embarrassment or loss of control during the procedure. Moreover, the emergence and global thread of new communicable diseases might seriously affect the functioning of contemporary centres performing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Innovative solutions are needed: artificial intelligence (AI) and physical robotics will drastically contribute for the future of the healthcare services. The translation of robotic technologies from traditional surgery to minimally invasive endoscopic interventions is an emerging field, mainly challenged by the tough requirements for miniaturization. Pioneering approaches for robotic colonoscopy have been reported in the nineties, with the appearance of inchworm-like devices. Since then, robotic colonoscopes with assistive functionalities have become commercially available. Research prototypes promise enhanced accessibility and flexibility for future therapeutic interventions, even via autonomous or robotic-assisted agents, such as robotic capsules. Furthermore, the pairing of such endoscopic systems with AI-enabled image analysis and recognition methods promises enhanced diagnostic yield. By assembling a multidisciplinary team of engineers and endoscopists, the paper aims to provide a contemporary and highly-pictorial critical review for robotic colonoscopes, hence providing clinicians and researchers with a glimpse of the major changes and challenges that lie ahead.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Deding, Ulrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient-reported outcomes and preferences for colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy : A systematic review with meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Diagnostics. - : MDPI AG. - 2075-4418. ; 11:9
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Colon capsule endoscopy as an alternative to colonoscopy for the diagnosis of colonic disease may serve as a less invasive and more tolerable investigation for patients. Our aim was to examine patient-reported outcomes for colon capsule endoscopy compared to conventional optical colonoscopy including preference of investigation modality, tolerability and adverse events. A systematic literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed and Embase. Search results were thoroughly screened for in-and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent assessment of transparency and completeness, after which, data for meta-analysis were extracted. Pooled estimates of patient preference were calculated and heterogeneity was examined including univariate meta-regressions. Patient-reported tolerability and adverse events were reviewed. Out of fourteen included studies, twelve had investigated patient-reported outcomes in patients who had undergone both investigations, whereas in two the patients were randomized between investigations. Pooled patient preferences were estimated to be 52% (CI 95%: 41–63%) for colon capsule endoscopy and 45% (CI 95%: 33–57%) for conventional colonoscopy: not indicating a significant difference. Procedural adverse events were rarely reported by patients for either investigation. The tolerability was high for both colon capsule endoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patient preferences for conventional colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy were not significantly different. Procedural adverse events were rare and the tolerability for colon capsule endoscopy was consistently reported higher or equal to that of conventional colonoscopy.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
