High-definition vs. standard-definition colonoscopy in the characterization of small colonic polyps: results from a randomized trial

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Background and study aims: The resolution of endoscopes has increased in recent years. Modern Fujinon colonoscopes have a charge-coupled device (CCD) pixel density of 650000 pixels compared with the 410000 pixel CCD in standard-definition scopes. Acquiring high-definition scopes represents a significant capital investment and their clinical value remains uncertain. The aim of the current study was to investigate the impact of high-definition endoscopes on the in vivo histology prediction of colonic polyps.

Patients and methods: Colonoscopy procedures were performed using Fujinon colonoscopes and EPX-4400 processor. Procedures were randomized to be performed using either a standard-definition EC-530 colonoscope or high-definition EC-530 and EC-590 colonoscopes. Polyps of < 10 mm were assessed using both white light imaging (WLI) and flexible spectral imaging color enhancement (FICE), and the predicted diagnosis was recorded. Polyps were removed and sent for histological analysis by a pathologist who was blinded to the endoscopic diagnosis. The predicted diagnosis was compared with the histology to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of in vivo assessment using either standard- or high-definition scopes.

Results: A total of 293 polyps of < 10 mm were examined – 150 polyps using the standard-definition colonoscope and 143 polyps using high-definition colonoscopes. There was no difference in sensitivity, specificity or accuracy between the two scopes when WLI was used (standard vs. high: accuracy 70 % [95 %CI 62 – 77] vs. 73 % [95 %CI 65 – 80]; P = 0.61). When FICE was used, high-definition colonoscopes showed a sensitivity of 93 % compared with 83 % for standard-definition colonoscopes (P = 0.048); specificity was 81 % and 82 %, respectively.

Conclusions: There was no difference between high- and standard-definition colonoscopes when white light was used, but FICE significantly improved the in vivo diagnosis of small polyps when high-definition scopes were used compared with standard definition.

• References

• 1 Ignjatovic A, East J, Suzuki N et al. Optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps at routine colonoscopy (Detect Inspect Characterise Resect and Discard; DISCARD trial): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncology 2009; 10: 1171-1178
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Pohl J, Nguyen-Tat M, Pech O et al. Computed virtual chromoendoscopy for classification of small colorectal lesions: a prospective comparative study. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 562-569
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Pohl J, Lotterer E, Balzer C et al. Computed virtual chromoendoscopy versus standard colonoscopy with targeted indigocarmine chromoscopy: a randomised multicentre trial. Gut 2009; 58: 73-78
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Togashi K, Osawa H, Koinuma K et al. Comparison of conventional endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and the optimal-band imaging system for the differentiation of neoplastic and non-neoplastic colonic polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69 (03) 734-741
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Teixeira CR, Torresini RS, Canali C et al. Endoscopic classification of the capillary-vessel pattern of colorectal lesions by spectral estimation technology and magnifying zoom imaging. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 750-756
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Hassan C, Pickhardt P, Rex D. A resect and discard strategy would improve cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 865-869
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Rex DK, Kahi C, O’Brien M et al. The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy PIVI (Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations) on real-time endoscopic assessment of the histology of diminutive colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 419-422
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Cairns SR, Scholefield JH, Steele RJ et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups. Gut 2010; 59: 666-689
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Davila R, Rajan E, Baron T et al. ASGE guideline: colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 546-557
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Participants of the Paris workshop. The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 3-43
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Longcroft-Wheaton GR, Higgins B, Bhandari P. Flexible spectral imaging color enhancement and indigo carmine in neoplasia diagnosis during colonoscopy: a large prospective UK series. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 23: 903-911
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Gunnam R. Global endoscopes pipeline analysis, opportunity assessment and market forecasts to 2016. 2010 GDME0004MAR globaldata.com
  PubMedGoogle Scholar