ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Effect of a distal attachment cuff on adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy: Randomized controlled trial in the Spanish population.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Endocuff Vision (EV) is a disposable device designed to improve polyp detection. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of EV on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and mean number of adenomas per patient (MAP). Patients and methods: This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared EV-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and standard colonoscopy (SC). Patients were referred due to a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in a bowel cancer screening program (BCSP), direct screening colonoscopy without prior FIT, surveillance colonoscopy, or family history of colorectal cancer. Results: In total, 1437 patients (55.9% male; median age, 59 years) were randomized at eight Spanish university hospitals. No significant differences were found in either the ADR (EAC vs. SC, 55.8% vs. 54.3%; Conclusions: EV did not improve either ADR or MAP. EV may increase difficulty of ileal intubation whenever it is attempted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.