Standard-definition White-light, High-definition White-light versus Narrow-band Imaging Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenomas: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Current Medical Science Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1007/s11596-024-2882-2
Chang-Wei Duan, Hui-Hong Zhai, Hui Xie, Xian-Zong Ma, Dong-Liang Yu, Lang Yang, Xin Wang, Yu-Fen Tang, Jie Zhang, Hui Su, Jian-Qiu Sheng, Jun-Feng Xu, Peng Jin
{"title":"Standard-definition White-light, High-definition White-light versus Narrow-band Imaging Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenomas: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Chang-Wei Duan, Hui-Hong Zhai, Hui Xie, Xian-Zong Ma, Dong-Liang Yu, Lang Yang, Xin Wang, Yu-Fen Tang, Jie Zhang, Hui Su, Jian-Qiu Sheng, Jun-Feng Xu, Peng Jin","doi":"10.1007/s11596-024-2882-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy (SD-WL), high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WL), and high-definition narrow-band imaging (HD-NBI) in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination, screening, and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected. The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled, data from 596 patients were analyzed. The ADRs were 34.5% in the SD-WL group, 33.5% in the HD-WL group, and 37.5% in the HD-NBI group (P=0.72). The advanced neoplasm detection rates (ANDRs) in the three arms were 17.1%, 15.5%, and 10.4% (P=0.17). No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR (ADR: 34.5% vs. 35.6%, P=0.79; ANDR: 17.1% vs. 13.0%, P=0.16, respectively). Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group (ADR: 33.5% vs. 37.7%, P=0.45; ANDR: 15.5% vs. 10.4%, P=0.18, respectively). In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL (HD-WL: OR 0.91, P=0.69; HD-NBI: OR 1.15, P=0.80).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients. It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL, but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future. Our study's conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources, especially advanced imaging technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":10820,"journal":{"name":"Current Medical Science","volume":" ","pages":"554-560"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-024-2882-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy (SD-WL), high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WL), and high-definition narrow-band imaging (HD-NBI) in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.

Methods: This was a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination, screening, and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected. The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results: Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled, data from 596 patients were analyzed. The ADRs were 34.5% in the SD-WL group, 33.5% in the HD-WL group, and 37.5% in the HD-NBI group (P=0.72). The advanced neoplasm detection rates (ANDRs) in the three arms were 17.1%, 15.5%, and 10.4% (P=0.17). No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR (ADR: 34.5% vs. 35.6%, P=0.79; ANDR: 17.1% vs. 13.0%, P=0.16, respectively). Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group (ADR: 33.5% vs. 37.7%, P=0.45; ANDR: 15.5% vs. 10.4%, P=0.18, respectively). In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL (HD-WL: OR 0.91, P=0.69; HD-NBI: OR 1.15, P=0.80).

Conclusion: HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients. It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL, but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future. Our study's conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources, especially advanced imaging technologies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于检测结直肠腺瘤的标准清晰度白光、高清晰度白光与窄带成像内窥镜:多中心随机对照试验。
研究目的本研究旨在比较标准清晰度白光内镜(SD-WL)、高清晰度白光内镜(HD-WL)和高清晰度窄带成像(HD-NBI)在中国人群中检测结直肠病变的效果:这是一项多中心、单盲、随机对照试验,采用非劣效性设计。2017年7月至2020年12月,接受内镜体检、筛查和监测的患者入组。主要结果指标是腺瘤检出率(ADR),即至少检出一个腺瘤的患者比例。使用单变量和多变量逻辑回归评估了检测到腺瘤的相关因素:在 653 名符合条件的登记患者中,对 596 名患者的数据进行了分析。SD-WL组的ADR为34.5%,HD-WL组为33.5%,HD-NBI组为37.5%(P=0.72)。三组的晚期肿瘤检出率(ANDRs)分别为17.1%、15.5%和10.4%(P=0.17)。SD组与HD组在ADR或ANDR方面无明显差异(ADR:分别为34.5% vs. 35.6%,P=0.79;ANDR:分别为17.1% vs. 13.0%,P=0.16)。在 HD-WL 组和 HD-NBI 组之间也观察到类似的结果(ADR:33.5% 对 37.7%,P=0.45;ANDR:15.5% 对 10.4%,P=0.18)。在单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析中,与SD-WL相比,HD-WL和HD-NBI在腺瘤总检出率方面均无显著差异(HD-WL:OR 0.91,P=0.69;HD-NBI:OR 1.15,P=0.80):结论:在中国门诊患者中,HD-NBI和HD-WL的腺瘤总体检出率与SD-WL相当。结论:在中国门诊患者中,HD-NBI 和 HD-WL 的腺瘤总体检出率与 SD-WL 相当,可以认为 HD-NBI 或 HD-WL 并不优于 SD-WL,但未来可能需要更有效的指导来指导不同内镜方法的选择。我们的研究结论可能有助于有效分配和利用有限的结肠镜检查资源,尤其是先进的成像技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Medical Science
Current Medical Science Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Current Medical Science provides a forum for peer-reviewed papers in the medical sciences, to promote academic exchange between Chinese researchers and doctors and their foreign counterparts. The journal covers the subjects of biomedicine such as physiology, biochemistry, molecular biology, pharmacology, pathology and pathophysiology, etc., and clinical research, such as surgery, internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, pediatrics and otorhinolaryngology etc. The articles appearing in Current Medical Science are mainly in English, with a very small number of its papers in German, to pay tribute to its German founder. This journal is the only medical periodical in Western languages sponsored by an educational institution located in the central part of China.
期刊最新文献
Qiliqiangxin Alleviates Imbalance of Inflammatory Cytokines in Patients with Dilated Cardiomyopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Brain-computer Interaction in the Smart Era. Contribution of ECT2 to Tubulointerstitial Fibrosis in the Progression of Chronic Kidney Disease. Performance Assessment of GPT 4.0 on the Japanese Medical Licensing Examination. Application and Prospects of Deep Learning Technology in Fracture Diagnosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1