Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Digestive Endoscopy 2022; 13(03): 193-198
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1755338
Review Article

Endocuff Vision to Improve Adenoma Vision: A Brief Overview

Jayendra Shukla
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
,
Jayanta Samanta 
1   Department of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC)-related mortality can be reduced through screening and early detection. The aim of any CRC screening program is to detect as many adenomas/polyps in the early stage as possible and hence, adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key quality indicator of colonoscopy. Various methods and techniques have been studied and developed over the years to improve the quality of colonoscopy and thereby increase ADR. This ranges from use of various regimens to improve bowel preparation, defining an optimum colonoscope withdrawal time for the operator, distal attachment caps, use of different wavelength of light, colonoscope with increased degree of view to the use of modern-day artificial intelligence to improve ADR. Of all the various measures, use of distal attachment device seems an easy, cheap and readily usable technique to increase real-time ADR. A variety of such devices have been evaluated over time starting from simple transparent caps, EndoRings, Endocuff to Endocuff Vision for their effectiveness. In this review, we have provided a brief description of the various available distal attachment devices and a detailed technical overview of Endocuff and its modification the Endocuff Vision.

Keywords

colonoscopy - polyp - adenoma detection rate - distal attachment cap - colorectal cancer

Authors' Contributions

J.S. contributed toward conception and design, review of literature, data analysis, drafting the work, and final approval. J.S. did the conception and design, data interpretation, intellectual review of the work, and final approval. All the authors have approved the final version of the work.




Publication History

Article published online:
13 September 2022

© 2022. Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy of India. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Gkolfakis P, Tziatzios G, Spartalis E, Papanikolaou IS, Triantafyllou K. Colonoscopy attachments for the detection of precancerous lesions during colonoscopy: a review of the literature. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24 (37) 4243-4253
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR. et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370 (14) 1298-1306
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Zippi M, Hong W, Crispino P, Traversa G. New device to implement the adenoma detection rate. World J Clin Cases 2017; 5 (07) 258-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Zorzi M, Hassan C, Battagello J. et al; ItaVision Working Group. Adenoma detection by Endocuff-assisted versus standard colonoscopy in an organized screening program: the “ItaVision” randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2022; 54 (02) 138-147
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Mir FA, Boumitri C, Ashraf I. et al. Cap-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy: is the cap beneficial? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Gastroenterol 2017; 30 (06) 640-648
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dik VK, Gralnek IM, Segol O. et al. Multicenter, randomized, tandem evaluation of EndoRings colonoscopy—results of the CLEVER study. Endoscopy 2015; 47 (12) 1151-1158
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hassan C, Senore C, Manes G. et al. Diagnostic yield and miss rate of EndoRings in an organized colorectal cancer screening program: the SMART (Study Methodology for ADR-Related Technology) trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89 (03) 583-590 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Triantafyllou K, Polymeros D, Apostolopoulos P. et al. Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy is associated with a lower adenoma miss rate: a multicenter randomized tandem study. Endoscopy 2017; 49 (11) 1051-1060
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Aziz M, Haghbin H, Gangwani MK. et al. Efficacy of Endocuff Vision compared to first-generation Endocuff in adenoma detection rate and polyp detection rate in high-definition colonoscopy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9 (01) E41-E50
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Patel HK, Chandrasekar VT, Srinivasan S. et al. Second-generation distal attachment cuff improves adenoma detection rate: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93 (03) 544-553 .e7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ngu WS, Bevan R, Tsiamoulos ZP. et al. Improved adenoma detection with Endocuff Vision: the ADENOMA randomised controlled trial. Gut 2019; 68 (02) 280-288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Rees CJ, Brand A, Ngu WS. et al; B-ADENOMA trial group comprises. BowelScope: accuracy of detection using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial. Gut 2020; 69 (11) 1959-1965
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rex DK, Slaven JE, Garcia J, Lahr R, Searight M, Gross SA. Endocuff vision reduces inspection time without decreasing lesion detection: a clinical randomized trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18 (01) 158-162 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Jacob A, Schafer A, Yong J. et al. Endocuff Vision-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. ANZ J Surg 2019; 89 (05) E174-E178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rameshshanker R, Tsiamoulos Z, Wilson A. et al. Endoscopic cuff-assisted colonoscopy versus cap-assisted colonoscopy in adenoma detection: randomized tandem study-Detection in Tandem Endocuff Cap Trial (DETECT). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91 (04) 894-904 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Marsano J, Johnson S, Yan S. et al. Comparison of colon adenoma detection rates using cap-assisted and Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E1585-E1591
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Rex DK, Sagi SV, Kessler WR. et al. A comparison of 2 distal attachment mucosal exposure devices: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90 (05) 835-840 .e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 von Figura G, Hasenöhrl M, Haller B. et al. Endocuff vision-assisted vs. standard polyp resection in the colorectum (the EVASTA study): a prospective randomized study. Endoscopy 2020; 52 (01) 45-51
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Karsenti D, Tharsis G, Perrot B. et al. Adenoma detection by Endocuff-assisted versus standard colonoscopy in routine practice: a cluster-randomised crossover trial. Gut 2020; 69 (12) 2159-2164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar