Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy: the relevance of study design
  1. David A Westwood1,
  2. Nicholas Alexakis2,
  3. Saxon J Connor3
  1. 1Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia
  2. 2Department of Surgery, University of Athens, Hippocratio Hospital, Athens, Greece
  3. 3Department of Surgery, Christchurch Hospital, Canterbury, New Zealand
  1. Correspondence to Dr David Westwood, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Lance Townsend Building, Austin Health, Studley Road, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia; d.westwood{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

We read with interest the articles by Rastogi et al 1 and de Wijkerslooth et al 2 describing two randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) versus standard colonoscopy (SC) in Western populations. These trials both used a parallel randomised study design, but yielded conflicting results with regard to adenoma detection rate. While Rastogi et al 1 found a significantly higher adenoma detection rate with CAC compared with SC, de Wijkerslooth et al 2 demonstrated no difference between the two …

View Full Text


  • Linked articles 301327, 300187.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles