1
|
Spada C, Fiori G, Uebel P, Tontini GE, Cesaro P, Grazioli LM, Soru P, Bravi I, Hinkel C, Prada A, Di Paolo D, Zimmermann T, Manes G, Valats JC, Jakobs R, Elli L, Carnovali M, Ciprandi G, Radaelli F, Vecchi M. Oral mannitol for bowel preparation: a dose-finding phase II study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2022; 78:1991-2002. [PMID: 36287232 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-022-03405-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Successful bowel preparation (BP) for colonoscopy depends on the instructions, diet, the laxative product, and patient adherence, which all affect colonoscopy quality. Nevertheless, there are no laxatives which combine effectiveness, safety, easy self-administration, good patient acceptance, and low cost. However, mannitol, a sugar alcohol, could be an attractive candidate for use in clinical practice if it is shown to demonstrate adequate efficacy and safety.
Aims
The present phase II dose-finding study compared three doses of mannitol (50, 100, and 150 g) to identify the best dose to be used in a subsequent phase III study.
Methods
The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, caecal intubation rate, adherence, acceptability, and safety profile, including measurement of potentially dangerous colonic gas concentrations (CH4, H2, O2), were considered in all patients. A weighted algorithm was used to identify the best mannitol dose for use in the subsequent study.
Results
The per-protocol population included 60 patients in the 50 g group, 54 in the 100 g group, and 49 in the 150 g group. The 100 g dose was the best as it afforded optimal colon cleansing efficacy (94.4% of patients had adequate BP), adherence, acceptability, and safety, including negligible gas concentrations.
Conclusions
The present study demonstrated that the colon cleansing efficacy and safety of mannitol were dose dependent. Conversely, gas concentrations were not dose dependent and negligible in all patients. Combined evaluation of efficacy, tolerability, and safety, using a weighted algorithm, determined that mannitol 100 g was the best dose for the phase III study.
Collapse
|
2
|
Taveira F, Hassan C, Kaminski MF, Ponchon T, Benamouzig R, Bugajski M, de Castelbajac F, Cesaro P, Chergui H, Goran L, Minelli Grazioli L, Janičko M, Januszewicz W, Lamonaca L, Lenz J, Negreanu L, Repici A, Spada C, Spadaccini M, State M, Szlak J, Veseliny E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Areia M. The Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS): a two-phase evaluation study. Endoscopy 2022; 54:45-51. [PMID: 33285583 DOI: 10.1055/a-1331-4325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To date, no scale has been validated to assess bubbles associated with bowel preparation. This study aimed to develop and assess the reliability of a novel scale - the Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS). METHODS This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study with two online evaluation phases of 45 randomly distributed still colonoscopy images (15 per scale grade). Observers assessed images twice, 2 weeks apart, using CEBuS (CEBuS-0 - no or minimal bubbles, covering < 5 % of the surface; CEBuS-1 - bubbles covering 5 %-50 %; CEBuS-2 - bubbles covering > 50 %) and reporting the clinical action (do nothing; wash with water; wash with simethicone). RESULTS CEBuS provided high levels of agreement both in evaluation Phase 1 (4 experts) and Phase 2 (6 experts and 13 non-experts), with almost perfect intraobserver reliability: kappa 0.82 (95 % confidence interval 0.75-0.88) and 0.86 (0.85-0.88); interobserver agreement - intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.83 (0.73-0.89) and 0.90 (0.86-0.94). Previous endoscopic experience had no influence on agreement among experts vs. non-experts: kappa 0.86 (0.80-0.91) vs. 0.87 (0.84-0.89) and ICC 0.91 (0.87-0.94) vs. 0.90 (0.86-0.94), respectively. Interobserver agreement on clinical action was ICC 0.63 (0.43-0.78) in Phase 1 and 0.77 (0.68-0.84) in Phase 2. Absolute agreement on clinical action per scale grade was 85 % (82-88) for CEBuS-0, 21 % (16-26) for CEBuS-1, and 74 % (70-78) for CEBuS-2. CONCLUSION CEBuS proved to be a reliable instrument to standardize the evaluation of colonic bubbles during colonoscopy. Assessment in daily practice is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filipe Taveira
- Department of Gastroenterology, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Michal F Kaminski
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.,Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Clinical Oncology, Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland.,Department of Cancer Prevention, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.,Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Thierry Ponchon
- Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
| | - Robert Benamouzig
- Service de Gastroentérologie, Hôpital Avicenne (APHP), Bobigny, France
| | - Marek Bugajski
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.,Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Clinical Oncology, Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland
| | | | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Hasnae Chergui
- Service de Gastroentérologie, Hôpital Avicenne (APHP), Bobigny, France
| | - Loredana Goran
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital, 'Carol Davila' University Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Martin Janičko
- 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
| | - Wladyslaw Januszewicz
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.,Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Clinical Oncology, Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Laura Lamonaca
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS -, Rozzano, Lombardia, Italy
| | - Jamila Lenz
- Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
| | - Lucian Negreanu
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital, 'Carol Davila' University Bucharest, Romania
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS -, Rozzano, Lombardia, Italy
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Spadaccini
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS -, Rozzano, Lombardia, Italy
| | - Monica State
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital, 'Carol Davila' University Bucharest, Romania
| | - Jakub Szlak
- Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Eduard Veseliny
- 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
| | - Mário Dinis-Ribeiro
- Center for Research in Health Technologies and Information Systems (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, Porto, Portugal.,Gastroenterology Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto, Portugal
| | - Miguel Areia
- Department of Gastroenterology, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.,Center for Research in Health Technologies and Information Systems (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rimbaş M, Anderloni A, Napoléon B, Seicean A, Forti E, Crinò SF, Tarantino I, Arcidiacono PG, Fabbri C, Rizzatti G, Amato A, Voiosu T, Fugazza A, Moșteanu O, Ginès À, de Nucci G, Fusaroli P, Nguyen NQ, Di Mitri R, Minelli Grazioli L, Mutignani M, Archibugi L, Binda C, Cominardi A, Barbera C, Fernández-Esparrach G, Palazzo L, Palazzo M, Poley JW, Spada C, Valerii G, Itoi T, Matsunami Y, Mateescu RB, Băicuș C, Costamagna G, Larghi A. Common bile duct size in malignant distal obstruction and lumen-apposing metal stents: a multicenter prospective study. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9:E1801-E1810. [PMID: 34790548 PMCID: PMC8589552 DOI: 10.1055/a-1526-1208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2021] [Accepted: 05/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and study aims Feasibility of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS) using available lumen-apposing stents (LAMS) is limited by the size of the common bile duct (CBD) (≤ 12 mm, cut-off for experts; 15 mm, cut-off for non-experts). We aimed to assess the prevalence and predictive factors associated with CBD size ≥ 12 and 15 mm in naïve patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Patients and methods This was a prospective cohort study involving 22 centers with assessment of CBD diameter and subjective feasibility of the EUS-CDS performance in naïve jaundiced patients undergoing EUS evaluation for MDBO. Results A total of 491 patients (mean age 69 ± 12 years) with mean serum bilirubin of 12.7 ± 6.6 mg/dL entered the final analysis. Dilation of the CBD ≥ 12 and 15 mm was detected in 78.8 % and 51.9 % of cases, respectively. Subjective feasibility of EUS-CDS was expressed by endosonographers in 91.2 % for a CBD ≥ 12 mm and in 96.5 % for a CBD ≥ 15 mm. On multivariate analysis, age ( P < 0.01) and bilirubin level ( P ≤ 0.001) were the only factors associated with both CBD dilation ≥ 12 and ≥ 15 mm. These variables were poorly associated with the extent of duct dilation; however, based on them a prediction model could be constructed that satisfactorily predicted CBD size ≥ 12 mm in patients at least 70 years and a bilirubin level ≥ 7 mg/dL. Conclusions Our study showed that at presentation in a large cohort of patients with MDBO, EUS-CDS can be potentially performed in three quarters to half of cases by expert and less experienced endosonographers, respectively. Dedicated stents or devices with different designs able to overcome the limitations of existing electrocautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-CDS are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihai Rimbaş
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy,Department of Internal Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Andrea Anderloni
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Bertrand Napoléon
- Endoscopy Unit, Jean Mermoz Private Hospital, Ramsay Generale de Santé, Lyon, France
| | - Andrada Seicean
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Edoardo Forti
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Francesco Crinò
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Ilaria Tarantino
- Endoscopy Service, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, Istituto Mediterraneo per i Trapianti e Terapie ad alta Specializzazione, Palermo, Italy
| | - Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono
- Pancreato-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Fabbri
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Italy
| | - Gianenrico Rizzatti
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy,CERTT, Center for Endoscopic Research Therapeutics and Training, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Arnaldo Amato
- Gastroenterology Division, Valduce Hospital, Como, Italy
| | - Theodor Voiosu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Department of Internal Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Alessandro Fugazza
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Division of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Ofelia Moșteanu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Àngels Ginès
- Endoscopy Unit, Institut de Malalties Digestives i Metabòliques, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBEREHD, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Germana de Nucci
- Gastroenterology Unit, ASST Rhodense, Garbagnate Milanese, Italy
| | - Pietro Fusaroli
- Gastroenterology Unit, Hospital of Imola, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy
| | - Nam Quoc Nguyen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Roberto Di Mitri
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, ARNAS Civico – Di Cristina – Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy
| | | | | | - Livia Archibugi
- Pancreato-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Cecilia Binda
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Italy
| | - Anna Cominardi
- Gastroenterology Unit, Hospital of Imola, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy
| | - Carmelo Barbera
- U.O.C. di Gastroenterologia ed Endoscopia Digestiva, Ospedale Giuseppe Mazzini, ASL Teramo, Italy
| | - Glòria Fernández-Esparrach
- Endoscopy Unit, Institut de Malalties Digestives i Metabòliques, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBEREHD, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Maxime Palazzo
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Beaujon University Hospital, Clichy-la-Garenne, France
| | - Jan Werner Poley
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy,Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italia
| | - Giorgio Valerii
- U.O.C. di Gastroenterologia ed Endoscopia Digestiva, Ospedale Giuseppe Mazzini, ASL Teramo, Italy
| | - Takao Itoi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukitoshi Matsunami
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Radu Bogdan Mateescu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Department of Internal Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Cristian Băicuș
- Department of Internal Medicine, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Guido Costamagna
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy,CERTT, Center for Endoscopic Research Therapeutics and Training, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Larghi
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy,CERTT, Center for Endoscopic Research Therapeutics and Training, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Repici A, Spada C, Cannizzaro R, Traina M, Maselli R, Maiero S, Galtieri A, Guarnieri G, Di Leo M, Lorenzetti R, Capogreco A, Spadaccini M, Antonelli G, Zullo A, Amata M, Ferrara E, Correale L, Granata A, Cesaro P, Radaelli F, Minelli Grazioli L, Anderloni A, Fugazza A, Finati E, Pellegatta G, Carrara S, Occhipinti P, Buda A, Fuccio L, Manno M, Hassan C. Novel 1-L polyethylene glycol + ascorbate versus high-volume polyethylene glycol regimen for colonoscopy cleansing: a multicenter, randomized, phase IV study. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94:823-831.e9. [PMID: 33940043 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2021.04.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Adequate bowel cleansing is critical to ensure quality and safety of a colonoscopy. A novel 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1L-PEG+ASC) regimen was previously validated against low-volume regimens but was never compared with high-volume regimens. METHODS In a phase IV study, patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to receive split-dose 1L PEG+ASC or a split-dose 4-L PEG-based regimen (4L-PEG) in 5 Italian centers. Preparation was assessed with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) by local endoscopists and centralized reading, both blinded to the randomization arm. The primary endpoint was noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC in colon cleansing. Secondary endpoints were superiority of 1L-PEG+ASC, patient compliance, segmental colon cleansing, adenoma detection rate, tolerability, and safety. RESULTS Three hundred eighty-eight patients (median age, 59.8 years) were randomized between January 2019 and October 2019: 195 to 1L-PEG+ASC and 193 to 4L-PEG. Noninferiority of 1L-PEG+ASC was demonstrated for cleansing in both the entire colon (BBPS ≥ 6: 97.9% vs 93%; relative risk [RR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.04; P superiority = .027) and in the right-sided colon segment (98.4% vs 96.0%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .99-1.02; P noninferiority = .013). Compliance was higher with 1L-PEG+ASC than with 4L-PEG (178/192 [92.7%] vs 154/190 patients [81.1%]; RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12), whereas no difference was found regarding safety (moderate/severe side effects: 20.8% vs 25.8%; P = .253). No difference in adenoma detection rate (38.8% vs 43.0%) was found. CONCLUSIONS One-liter PEG+ASC showed noninferiority compared with 4L-PEG in achieving adequate colon cleansing and provided a higher patient compliance. No differences in tolerability and safety were detected. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03742232.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Repici
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Renato Cannizzaro
- UO Oncological Gastroenterology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Mario Traina
- Endoscopy Service, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, Istituto ISMETT, Palermo, Italy
| | - Roberta Maselli
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Maiero
- UO Oncological Gastroenterology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Alessia Galtieri
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giovanni Guarnieri
- UO Oncological Gastroenterology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Milena Di Leo
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Antonio Capogreco
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Spadaccini
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulio Antonelli
- Digestive Endoscopy, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Angelo Zullo
- Digestive Endoscopy, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Michele Amata
- Endoscopy Service, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, Istituto ISMETT, Palermo, Italy
| | - Elisa Ferrara
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Antonino Granata
- Endoscopy Service, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, Istituto ISMETT, Palermo, Italy
| | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | | | | | - Andrea Anderloni
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Fugazza
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Elena Finati
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gaia Pellegatta
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Silvia Carrara
- Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Pietro Occhipinti
- Department of Gastroenterology, "Maggiore Della Carità" Hospital, Novara, Italy
| | - Andrea Buda
- Gastroenterology Unit, Santa Maria del Prato Hospital, Feltre, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Fuccio
- Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Mauro Manno
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Carpi-Mirandola Hospitals, Azienda USL Modena
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Digestive Endoscopy, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Donato G, Forti E, Mutignani M, Laterra MA, Arese D, Coppola F, Zaccari P, Mariani A, Arcidiacono PG, Pigò F, Conigliaro R, Costa D, Tringali A, Lavagna A, Rocca R, Gabbiadini R, Fugazza A, Repici A, Fava G, Marini F, Mosca P, Urban F, Monica F, Crinò SF, Gabbrielli A, Blois M, Binda C, Sbrancia M, Fabbri C, Frego R, Dinelli M, Imbesi V, Gambitta P, Balzarini M, Segato S, Grazioli LM, Spada C, Amato A, Venezia G, Aragona G, Rosa C, Alvisi C, Devani M, Manes G, Dell’Amico I, Gemme C, Reati R, Auriemma F, Mangiavillano B, Rodi M, Bertani H, Mazzucco D, Armellini E, Cantù P, Penagini R, Occhipinti P. A multicenter survey on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography during the COVID-19 pandemic in northern and central Italy. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9:E629-E634. [PMID: 33880397 PMCID: PMC8050562 DOI: 10.1055/a-1380-3419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2020] [Accepted: 01/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and study aims COVID-19 has dramatically impacted endoscopy practice because upper endoscopy procedures can be aerosol-generating. Most elective procedures have been rescheduled. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is frequently performed in emergency or urgent settings in which rescheduling is not possible. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ERCP in Italy during the SARS-CoV-2 lockdown, in areas with high incidence of COVID-19. Patients and methods We performed a retrospective survey of centers performing ERCP in high COVID-19 prevalence areas in Italy to collect information regarding clinical data from patients undergoing ERCP, staff, case-volume and organization of endoscopy units from March 8, 2020 to April 30, 2020. Results We collected data from 31 centers and 804 patients. All centers adopted a triage and/or screening protocol for SARS-CoV-2 and performed follow-up of patients 2 weeks after the procedure. ERCP case-volume was reduced by 44.1 % compared to the respective 2019 timeframe. Of the 804 patients undergoing ERCP, 22 (2.7 %) were positive for COVID-19. Adverse events occurred at a similar rate to previously published data. Of the patients, endoscopists, and nurses, 1.6 %, 11.7 %, and 4.9 %, respectively, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at follow up. Only 38.7 % of centers had access to a negative-pressure room for ERCP. Conclusion The case-volume reduction for ERCP during lockdown was lower than for other gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. No definitive conclusions can be drawn about the percentage of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and healthcare workers observed after ERCP. Appropriate triage and screening of patients and adherence to society recommendations are paramount.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulio Donato
- Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Oncological and Specialty Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy
| | - Edoardo Forti
- Digestive and Operative Endoscopy Unit, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Massimiliano Mutignani
- Digestive and Operative Endoscopy Unit, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Daniele Arese
- Gastroenterology Unit, Ospedale San Giovanni Bosco, Torino, Italy
| | - Franco Coppola
- Gastroenterology Unit, Ospedale San Giovanni Bosco, Torino, Italy
| | - Piera Zaccari
- Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy and EUS Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Mariani
- Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy and EUS Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono
- Pancreatobiliary Endoscopy and EUS Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Flavia Pigò
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy – Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Modena, Ospedale di Baggiovara, Italy
| | - Rita Conigliaro
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy – Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Modena, Ospedale di Baggiovara, Italy,Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Modena, Policlinico di Modena, Italy
| | - Deborah Costa
- Gastroenterology Unit, ULSS 2 Marca Trevigiana, Ospedale Conegliano-Vittorio Veneto, Italy
| | - Alberto Tringali
- Gastroenterology Unit, ULSS 2 Marca Trevigiana, Ospedale Conegliano-Vittorio Veneto, Italy
| | | | - Rodolfo Rocca
- Gastroenterology Unit, AO Ordine Mauriziano, Torino, Italy
| | - Roberto Gabbiadini
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center – IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Fugazza
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center – IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center – IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Giammarco Fava
- SOD Malattie Apparato Digerente, Endoscopia Digestiva, Malattie Infiammatorie Croniche Intestinali, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Francesco Marini
- SOD Malattie Apparato Digerente, Endoscopia Digestiva, Malattie Infiammatorie Croniche Intestinali, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Piergiorgio Mosca
- SOD Malattie Apparato Digerente, Endoscopia Digestiva, Malattie Infiammatorie Croniche Intestinali, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Flavia Urban
- Gastroenterology Unit, ASU GI Ospedale di Cattinara Trieste, Italy
| | - Fabio Monica
- Gastroenterology Unit, ASU GI Ospedale di Cattinara Trieste, Italy
| | | | - Armando Gabbrielli
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, The Pancreas Institute, Verona, Italy
| | - Matteo Blois
- Operative Endoscopy Unit, Azienda Usl Toscana Nord-Ovest, Livorno, Italy
| | - Cecilia Binda
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Italy
| | - Monica Sbrancia
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Italy
| | - Carlo Fabbri
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Italy
| | | | | | - Venerina Imbesi
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ASST Ovest Milanese, Legnano, Milan, Italy
| | - Pietro Gambitta
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ASST Ovest Milanese, Legnano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Sergio Segato
- Gastroenterology Unit, ASST Sette-Laghi, Varese, Italy
| | | | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - Arnaldo Amato
- Gastroenterology Unit, Ospedale Valduce, Como, Italy
| | - Giovanna Venezia
- Gastroenterology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera S.Croce e Carle, Cuneo, Italy
| | - Giovanni Aragona
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology Unit, Ospedale Civile, AUSL Piacenza, Italy
| | - Cesare Rosa
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ASST Pavia, Ospedali Voghera-Vigevano, Pavia, Italy
| | - Costanza Alvisi
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ASST Pavia, Ospedali Voghera-Vigevano, Pavia, Italy
| | | | | | - Iginio Dell’Amico
- Endoscopy Unit, Azienda Usl Toscana Nord-Ovest, Massa Carrara, Italy
| | - Carlo Gemme
- Gastroenterology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera SS. Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo, Alessandria, Italy
| | - Raffaella Reati
- ASST Rhodense, Presidio di Garbagnate Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Auriemma
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas – Mater Domini, Castellanza, Varese, Italy
| | | | - Marcello Rodi
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Ospedale S. Andrea, ASL VC, Vercelli, Italy
| | - Helga Bertani
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Modena, Policlinico di Modena, Italy
| | | | - Elia Armellini
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ASST Bergamo Est, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Paolo Cantù
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Penagini
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Pietro Occhipinti
- Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Oncological and Specialty Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Milluzzo SM, Cesaro P, Grazioli LM, Olivari N, Spada C. Artificial Intelligence in Lower Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: The Current Status and Future Perspective. Clin Endosc 2021; 54:329-339. [PMID: 33434961 PMCID: PMC8182250 DOI: 10.5946/ce.2020.082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 07/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The present manuscript aims to review the history, recent advances, evidence, and challenges of artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy. Although it is mainly focused on polyp detection and characterization, it also considers other potential applications (i.e., inflammatory bowel disease) and future perspectives. Some of the most recent algorithms show promising results that are similar to human expert performance. The integration of AI in routine clinical practice will be challenging, with significant issues to overcome (i.e., regulatory, reimbursement). Medico-legal issues will also need to be addressed. With the exception of an AI system that is already available in selected countries (GI Genius; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA), the majority of the technology is still in its infancy and has not yet been proven to reach a sufficient diagnostic performance to be adopted in the clinical practice. However, larger players will enter the arena of AI in the next few months.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Manuel Milluzzo
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Department of Gastroenterology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS -Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy
| | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | | | - Nicola Olivari
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit and Gastroenterology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Department of Gastroenterology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS -Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Affiliation(s)
- Leonardo Minelli Grazioli
- Endoscopy Unit, Division of Medicine, Gastroenterology, and Endoscopy, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - Sebastian Manuel Milluzzo
- Endoscopy Unit, Division of Medicine, Gastroenterology, and Endoscopy, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - Cristiano Spada
- Endoscopy Unit, Division of Medicine, Gastroenterology, and Endoscopy, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Rimbaş M, Zahiu DCM, Voiosu AM, Voiosu TA, Zlate AAM, Dinu R, Galasso D, Minelli Grazioli L, Campanale M, Barbaro F, Mateescu BR, Busuioc B, Iordache T, Dolofan O, Popescu AM, Balaban VD, Raducan MM, Spada C, Băicuş CR, Costamagna G. Usefulness of virtual chromoendoscopy in the evaluation of subtle small bowel ulcerative lesions by endoscopists with no experience in videocapsule. Endosc Int Open 2016; 4:E508-14. [PMID: 27227106 PMCID: PMC4874791 DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-106206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2015] [Accepted: 03/29/2016] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS In videocapsule endoscopy examination (VCE), subtle variations in mucosal hue or pattern such as those seen in ulcerations can be difficult to detect, depending on the experience of the reader. Our aim was to test whether virtual chromoendoscopy (VC) techniques, designed to enhance the contrast between the lesion and the normal mucosa, could improve the characterization of ulcerative mucosal lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifteen trainees or young gastroenterologists with no experience in VCE were randomly assigned to evaluate 250 true ulcerative and 100 false ulcerative, difficult-to-interpret small bowel lesions, initially as white light images (WLI) and then, in a second round, with the addition of one VC setting or again as WLI, labeling them as real lesions or artifacts. RESULTS On the overall image evaluation, an improvement in lesion characterization was observed by adding any chromoendoscopy setting, especially Blue mode and FICE 1, with increases in accuracy of 13 % [95 %CI 0.8, 25.3] and 7.1 % [95 %CI - 17.0, 31.3], respectively. However, when only false ulcerative images were considered, with the same presets (Blue mode and FICE 1), there was a loss in accuracy of 10.7 % [95 %CI - 10.9, 32.3] and 7.3 % [95 %CI - 1.3, 16.0], respectively. The interobserver agreement was poor for both readings. CONCLUSIONS VC helps beginner VCE readers correctly categorize difficult-to-interpret small bowel mucosal ulcerative lesions. However, false lesions tend to be misinterpreted as true ulcerative with the same presets. Therefore care is advised in using VC especially under poor bowel preparation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihai Rimbaş
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Internal Medicine Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Andrei Mihai Voiosu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Internal Medicine Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Theodor Alexandru Voiosu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Internal Medicine Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Roxana Dinu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | | | | | | | - Bogdan Radu Mateescu
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania,Internal Medicine Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Bogdan Busuioc
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Tiberiu Iordache
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Oana Dolofan
- Gastroenterology Department, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | | | - Mircea Mihai Raducan
- Internal Medicine Department, Carol Davila University of Medicine, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Spada C, Hassan C, Barbaro B, Iafrate F, Cesaro P, Petruzziello L, Minelli Grazioli L, Senore C, Brizi G, Costamagna I, Alvaro G, Iannitti M, Salsano M, Ciolina M, Laghi A, Bonomo L, Costamagna G. Colon capsule versus CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy: a prospective, comparative trial. Gut 2015; 64:272-81. [PMID: 24964317 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 90] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In case of incomplete colonoscopy, several radiologic methods have traditionally been used, but more recently, capsule endoscopy was also shown to be accurate. Aim of this study was to compare colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and CT colonography (CTC) in a prospective cohort of patients with incomplete colonoscopy. DESIGN Consecutive patients with a previous incomplete colonoscopy underwent CCE and CTC followed by colonoscopy in case of positive findings on either test (polyps/mass lesions ≥6 mm). Clinical follow-up was performed in the other cases to rule out missed cancer. CTC was performed after colon capsule excretion or 10-12 h postingestion. Since the gold standard colonoscopy was performed only in positive cases, diagnostic yield and positive predictive values of CCE and CTC were used as study end-points. RESULTS 100 patients were enrolled. CCE and CTC were able to achieve complete colonic evaluation in 98% of cases. In a per-patient analysis for polyps ≥6 mm, CCE detected 24 patients (24.5%) and CTC 12 patients (12.2%). The relative sensitivity of CCE compared to CTC was 2.0 (95% CI 1.34 to 2.98), indicating a significant increase in sensitivity for lesions ≥6 mm. Of larger polyps (≥10 mm), these values were 5.1% for CCE and 3.1% for CTC (relative sensitivity: 1.67 (95% CI 0.69 to 4.00)). Positive predictive values for polyps ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm were 96% and 85.7%, and 83.3% and 100% for CCE and CTC, respectively. No missed cancer occurred at clinical follow-up of a mean of 20 months. CONCLUSIONS CCE and CTC were of comparable efficacy in completing colon evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy; the overall diagnostic yield of colon capsule was superior to CTC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01525940.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Brunella Barbaro
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Franco Iafrate
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | - Carlo Senore
- Epidemiologia dei Tumori II, AOU S Giovanni Battista-CPO Piemonte Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Gabriella Brizi
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Giuseppe Alvaro
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marcella Iannitti
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Salsano
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Maria Ciolina
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Laghi
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Bonomo
- Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Spada C, Barbaro F, Andrisani G, Minelli Grazioli L, Hassan C, Costamagna I, Campanale M, Costamagna G. Colon capsule endoscopy: What we know and what we would like to know. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20:16948-16955. [PMID: 25493007 PMCID: PMC4258563 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i45.16948] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2014] [Revised: 08/01/2014] [Accepted: 09/19/2014] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Colonoscopy is usually perceived as an invasive and potentially painful procedure, being also affected by a small, but definite, risk of major complications (cardiopulmonary complications, perforation, hemorrhage) and even mortality. To improve both acceptability and safety, PillCam Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) (Given Imaging Ltd, Yoqneam, Israel) has been developed. CCE represents a non-invasive technique that is able to explore the colon without sedation and air insufflation. The Second Generation of Colon Capsule Endoscopy (PillCam Colon 2) (CCE-2) was proven to be an accurate tool to detect colonic neoplastic lesions when used in average risk individuals. To date, the evidence supports the use of CCE-2 in case of colonoscopy failure, in patients unwilling to perform colonoscopy and when colonoscopy is contraindicated. Other potential applications, such as colorectal cancer screening or diagnostic surveillance of inflammatory bowel disease need to be clarified. In this paper, the current “state of the art”, potential application of CCE and future needs are evaluated.
Collapse
|
11
|
Spada C, De Vincentis F, Cesaro P, Hassan C, Riccioni ME, Minelli Grazioli L, Bolivar S, Zurita A, Costamagna G. Accuracy and safety of second-generation PillCam COLON capsule for colorectal polyp detection. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2012; 5:173-8. [PMID: 22570677 PMCID: PMC3342572 DOI: 10.1177/1756283x12438054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
PillCam COLON capsule endoscopy (CCE) (Given Imaging Ltd, Yoqneam, Israel) is one of the most recent diagnostic, endoscopic technologies designed to explore the colon. CCE is a noninvasive, patient-friendly technique that is able to explore the colon without requiring sedation and air insufflation. The first generation of CCE was released onto the market in 2006 and although it generated great enthusiasm, it showed suboptimal accuracy. Recently, a second-generation system (PillCam COLON 2) (CCE-2) has been developed to increase sensitivity for colorectal polyp detection. In this review, accuracy and safety data for CCE-2 are analyzed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristiano Spada
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo A. Gemelli 8, 00168 Roma, Italy
| | | | - Paola Cesaro
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Andrade Zurita
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|