Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2012
The cap-assisted technique enhances colonoscopy training: prospective randomized study of six trainees.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02472730 (Cap Assisted Colonoscopy Enhances Quality Based Competency in Colonoscopy Among Trainees), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Cap Assisted Colonoscopy Enhances Quality Based Competency in Colonoscopy Among Trainees
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transparent cap colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy to improve caecal intubation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy performed by a single endoscopist in patients after colorectal resection.Medicine · 2016Trial
- Endocuff-Assisted versus Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy Performed by Trainees: A Retrospective Study.Clinical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Colonoscopy attachments for the detection of precancerous lesions during colonoscopy: A review of the literature.World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Review
- Cap-assisted colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials.Endoscopy international open · 2018Article
- Cap-assisted endoscopy: Do we have enough evidence?Endoscopy international open · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColonoscopy and polypectomy procedures have effectively reduced the incidence of colorectal cancer. Currently, competence in colonoscopy is an essential part of the education program for gastrointestinal (GI) trainees. However, considerable training is required for the optimal performance of a colonoscopy.
methodsThis study involved six colonoscopy trainees, three of whom used the cap whereas the others did not. Each trainee managed 100 cases of screening colonoscopy from beginning to end. The cecal intubation success rate, cecal intubation time, polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, advanced adenoma detection rate, and adenocarcinoma detection rate were checked. The rate of successful cecal intubation and the cecal intubation time were reviewed every 10 cases.
resultsThe cecal intubation rate was 80.7 % (242/300) in the cap group and 63.3 % (190/300) in the non-cap group. The average cecal intubation time was 13.7 min in the cap group and 18.7 min in the non-cap group. The statistical analysis of these results suggested that the cap group had a significantly higher success rate (p < 0.001) and a shorter cecal intubation time (p < 0.001) than the non-cap group. However, the two groups did not differ significantly in the detection rate for polyps (45.3 vs 43 %; p = 0.565), adenomas (26.3 vs 25 %; p = 0.709), advanced adenomas (2.6 vs 0.6 %; p = 0.056), or adenocarcinomas (5.3 vs 3 %; p = 0.153).
conclusionCap-assisted colonoscopies might help to increase the rate of cecal intubation success and shorten the cecal intubation time for GI trainees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22538693What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.