TY - JOUR T1 - BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial JF - Gut JO - Gut DO - 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-319621 SP - gutjnl-2019-319621 AU - Colin J Rees AU - Andrew Brand AU - Wee Sing Ngu AU - Clive Stokes AU - Zoe Hoare AU - Nicola Totton AU - Pradeep Bhandari AU - Linda Sharp AU - Alexandra Bastable AU - Matthew D Rutter AU - Ajay Mark Verma AU - Thomas J Lee AU - Martin Walls A2 - , Y1 - 2020/04/03 UR - http://gut.bmj.com/content/early/2020/04/09/gutjnl-2019-319621.abstract N2 - Objectives Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality marker at lower GI endoscopy. Higher ADRs are associated with lower postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates. The English flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening programme (BowelScope), offers a one-off FS to individuals aged 55 years. However, variation in ADR exists. Large studies have demonstrated improved ADR using Endocuff Vision (EV) within colonoscopy screening, but there are no studies within FS. We sought to test the effect of EV on ADR in a national FS screening population.Design BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using ENdocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving 16 English BowelScope screening centres. Individuals were randomised to Endocuff Vision-assisted BowelScope (EAB) or Standard BowelScope (SB). ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP), polyp characteristics and location, participant experience, procedural time and adverse events were measured. Comparison of ADR within the trial with national BowelScope ADR was also undertaken.Results 3222 participants were randomised (53% male) to receive EAB (n=1610) or SB (n=1612). Baseline demographics were comparable between arms. ADR in the EAB arm was 13.3% and that in the SB arm was 12.2% (p=0.353). No statistically significant differences were found in PDR, MAP, polyp characteristics or location, participant experience, complications or procedural characteristics. ADR in the SB control arm was 3.1% higher than the national ADR.Conclusion EV did not improve BowelScope ADR when compared with SB. ADR in both arms was higher than the national ADR. Where detection rates are already high, EV is unable to improve detection further.Trial registration numbers NCT03072472, ISRCTN30005319 and CPMS ID 33224. ER -