Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25593483›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Short turn radius colonoscope in an anatomical model: retroflexed withdrawal and detection of hidden polyps.

Sarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03155165 (Retroview™ vs. Conventional Colonoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03155165 completednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Retroview™ vs. Conventional Colonoscopy: it is Time to Change?

TypeobservationalSponsorInstituto Ecuatoriano de Enfermedades DigestivasRan2017 to 2017Enrolled100ConditionsColonic NeoplasmsArmsRetroview™ colonoscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Advances in endoscopy for colorectal polyp detection and classification.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah K McGillSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Shivangi KothariSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Shai FriedlandSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Ann ChenSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Walter G ParkSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Subhas BanerjeeSarah K McGill, Shivangi Kothari, Shai Friedland, Ann Chen, Walter G Park, Subhas Banerjee, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, United States.
Stanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate the new RetroView™ colonoscope and compare its ability to detect simulated polyps "hidden" behind colonic folds with that of a conventional colonoscope, utilizing anatomic colon models.

methodsThree anatomic colon models were prepared, with twelve simulated polyps "hidden" behind haustral folds and five placed in easily viewed locations in each model. Five blinded endoscopists examined two colon models in random order with the conventional or RetroView™ colonoscope, utilizing standard withdrawal technique. The third colon model was then examined with the RetroView™ colonoscope withdrawn initially in retroflexion and then in standard withdrawal. Polyp detection rates during standard and retroflexed withdrawal of the conventional and RetroView™ colonoscopes were determined. Polyp detection rates for combined standard and retroflexed withdrawal (combination withdrawal) with the RetroView™ colonoscope were also determined.

resultsFor hidden polyps, retroflexed withdrawal using the RetroView™ colonoscope detected more polyps than the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal (85% vs 12%, P = 0.0001). For hidden polyps, combination withdrawal with the RetroView™ colonoscope detected more polyps than the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal (93% vs 12%, P ≤ 0.0001). The RetroView™ colonoscope in "combination withdrawal" was superior to other methods in detecting all (hidden + easily visible) polyps, with successful detection of 80 of 85 polyps (94%) compared to 28 (32%) polyps detected by the conventional colonoscope in standard withdrawal (P < 0.0001) and 67 (79%) polyps detected by the RetroView™ colonoscope in retroflexed withdrawal alone (P < 0.01). Continuous withdrawal of the colonoscope through the colon model while retroflexed was achieved by all endoscopists. In a post-test survey, four out of five colonoscopists reported that manipulation of the colonoscope was easy or very easy.

conclusionIn simulated testing, the RetroView™ colonoscope increased detection of hidden polyps. Combining standard withdrawal with retroflexed withdrawal may become the new paradigm for "complete screening colonoscopy".

Indexed as

ColonoscopesModels, AnatomicAttitude of Health PersonnelColonColonic PolypsColonoscopyComputer SimulationEquipment DesignHumansPredictive Value of TestsSurveys and QuestionnairesAdenoma detectionColon cancerColonoscope retroflexionColonoscopyPolyp detection

Identifiers

PMID25593483
PMCPMC4294171
OpenAlexW2318182433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.