Publications

Detailed Information

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

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorChung, Su Jin-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Donghee-
dc.contributor.authorSong, Ji Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Min Jung-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Joo Sung-
dc.contributor.authorSong, In Sung-
dc.contributor.authorJung, Hyun Chae-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Young Sun-
dc.date.accessioned2012-05-25T07:22:34Z-
dc.date.available2012-05-25T07:22:34Z-
dc.date.issued2010-07-
dc.identifier.citationGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; Vol.72 1; 136-142ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn0016-5107-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/76484-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Colonoscopy is the criterion standard for screening of colorectal neoplasms. Nonetheless, a substantial miss rate with conventional, white-light colonoscopy (XL) 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 mm, and none were 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 >= 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. (Gastrointest Endosc 2010;72:136-42.)ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherMOSBY-ELSEVIERko_KR
dc.titleEfficacy 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 ratesko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor정수진-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김동희-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor송지현-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박민정-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김영순-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김주성-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor정현채-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor송인성-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.055-
dc.citation.journaltitleGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY-
dc.description.citedreferenceKang HW, 2010, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V105, P178, DOI 10.1038/ajg.2009.541-
dc.description.citedreferencePaggi S, 2009, CLIN GASTROENTEROL H, V7, P1049, DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.06.028-
dc.description.citedreferenceWada Y, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V70, P522, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2009.01.040-
dc.description.citedreferenceKanao H, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V69, P631, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.028-
dc.description.citedreferenceTogashi K, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V69, P734, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.063-
dc.description.citedreferenceAdler A, 2009, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V136, P410, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.10.022-
dc.description.citedreferencevan den Broek FJC, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V69, P124, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.040-
dc.description.citedreferencePohl J, 2009, GUT, V58, P73, DOI 10.1136/gut.2008.153601-
dc.description.citedreferenceKaltenbach T, 2008, GUT, V57, P1406, DOI 10.1136/gut.2007.137984-
dc.description.citedreferenceEll C, 2008, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V103, P883, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01708.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceHeresbach D, 2008, ENDOSCOPY, V40, P284, DOI 10.1055/s-2007-995618-
dc.description.citedreferencePohl J, 2008, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V103, P562, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01670.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceAdler A, 2008, GUT, V57, P59, DOI 10.1136/gut.2007.123539-
dc.description.citedreferenceEast JE, 2008, GUT, V57, P65, DOI 10.1136/gut.2007.128926-
dc.description.citedreferenceInoue T, 2008, J GASTROENTEROL, V43, P45, DOI 10.1007/s00535-007-2125-x-
dc.description.citedreferenceKaltenbach T, 2008, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V134, P327, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.10.062-
dc.description.citedreferenceHirata M, 2007, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V65, P988, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2006.07.046-
dc.description.citedreferenceChen SC, 2007, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V102, P856, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.01054.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceChiu HM, 2007, GUT, V56, P373, DOI 10.1136/gut.2006.099614-
dc.description.citedreferencePohl J, 2007, ENDOSCOPY, V39, P80, DOI 10.1055/s-2006-945045-
dc.description.citedreferenceBarclay RL, 2006, NEW ENGL J MED, V355, P2533-
dc.description.citedreferenceRex DK, 2006, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V101, P2866, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00905.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceRegula J, 2006, NEW ENGL J MED, V355, P1863, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa054967-
dc.description.citedreferenceSingh H, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P2366-
dc.description.citedreferenceRex DK, 2006, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V101, P873, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00673.x-
dc.description.citedreferencevan Rijn JC, 2006, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V101, P343, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00390.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceSoetikno R, 2006, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V130, P566, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.12.006-
dc.description.citedreferenceRobertson DJ, 2005, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V129, P34, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.05.012-
dc.description.citedreferenceSANO Y, 2005, DIGEST ENDOSC, V17, pS43-
dc.description.citedreferenceDiebold MD, 2004, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V99, P1795, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.40236.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceWhiting P, 2004, ANN INTERN MED, V140, P189-
dc.description.citedreferenceLieberman DA, 2003, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V290, P2959, DOI 10.1001/jama.290.22.2959-
dc.description.tc9-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share