Article Text

Download PDFPDF
PTH-011 Defining the optimal i-scan settings for small colonic polyp characterisation – results from a large prospective series
  1. PJ Basford,
  2. G Longcroft-Wheaton,
  3. P Bhandari
  1. Gastroenterology, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK


Introduction Characterisation of small colonic polyps has been identified as a key goal for advanced imaging modalities by the ASGE and ESGE. Pentax i-Scan is an endoscopic digital contrast technology shown to be an accurate tool for characterising small colonic polyps in-vivo. I-Scan combines features which accentuate dark-light borders (surface and contrast enhancement, SE/CE) and suppression of red light whist enhancing blue/green light (tone enhancement, TE). The optimal settings for use of i-Scan in the colon have yet to be determined.

Method High quality digital images of 100 small colonic polyps were recorded as part of a prospective study (NCT 01761279). Images of each polyp were recorded in 3 i-Scan modes: i-Scan 1 (SE/CE), i-Scan 2 (TE) and i-Scan 3 (SE/CE/TE). Randomised images were viewed by 2 blinded endoscopists who rated visibility of diagnostic features and predicted polyp histology (neoplastic vs non-neoplastic).

Results The proportion of adenomas rated as having visible pericryptal vessels were 59%, 81% and 82% for i-Scan 1, 2 and 3 respectively. The differences between i-Scan 1 and 2 (P = 0.001) and i-Scan 1 and 3 (P < 0.001) were statistically significant.

The difference in proportion of adenomas with no visible surface pattern between i-Scan 1 and 2 was statistically significant (26% vs 8%, P = 0.001), as was the difference between i-Scan 1 and 3 (26% vs 9%, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference between i-Scan 2 and 3 (8% vs 9%, P = 1.00).

Mean sensitivity for adenomatous histology between the two endoscopists was 69% for polyps viewed with i-Scan 1. Compared to i-Scan 1 assessments sensitivity was significantly higher with i-Scan 2 (86%, P = 0.006 for comparison), and with i-Scan 3 (87%, P = 0.003 for comparison). There was no significant difference in sensitivity between i-Scan 2 and i-Scan 3 assessments (86% vs 87%, P = 1.000).

No significant differences in specificity were found between the 3 i-Scan modes (i-Scan 1 vs i-Scan 2 P = 0.828, i-Scan 1 vs i-Scan 3 P = 1.000, i-Scan 1 vs i-Scan 3 P = 1.000).

Overall accuracy increased from 79% with i-Scan 1 to 86.5% with i-Scan 2 and 87.5% with i-Scan 3. There was no significant difference in overall accuracy between i-Scan 1 and i-Scan 2 (P = 0.063) or i-Scan 2 and i-Scan 3 (P = 0.882). However there was a significant difference between i-Scan 1 and i-Scan 3 assessments (P = 0.032).

Abstract PTH-011 Table 1

Conclusion Tone enhancement appears to be the most effective component of the i-Scan system for accurate small colonic polyp characterisation, with no additional benefit from the addition of surface/contrast enhancement.

Disclosure of interest None Declared.

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.