TY - JOUR
T1 - A novel retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device (Third Eye Retroscope) improves the detection of simulated polyps in anatomic models of the colon
AU - Triadafilopoulos, George
AU - Watts, H. David
AU - Higgins, Jack
AU - Van Dam, Jacques
N1 - Funding Information:
G.T. has received research support from TAP Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Xillix, and Astra-Zeneca for the conduct of clinical trials. He serves as a consultant and a member of the speakers' bureau to TAP, Astra-Zeneca, Pfizer, Osel, XenoPort, Xillix, Curon Medical, and Santarus, and has received honoraria for such activities. He has equity positions with Curon Medical, Inc, Osel, and Avantis Medical Systems. D.W. serves as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board and holds an equity position in Avantis Medical Systems, Inc. J.H. serves as a consultant for and holds an equity position in Avantis Medical Systems, Inc. J.V.D. is funded, in part, from grants No. NIH/1K24 DK59799-01, NIH/NIDDK/1R25 DK064139-01, NIH R21/R33 PAR-01-01 1R33CA099059, and NIH/NCI U54 CA105296. In addition, he serves as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board, has received research support and consulting fees, and holds an equity position in Avantis Medical Systems, Inc, and NeoGuide Inc.
PY - 2007/1
Y1 - 2007/1
N2 - Background: Colonoscopy is the "gold standard" for colorectal polyp and cancer detection, but important lesions may be missed on the proximal aspect of haustral folds, rectal valves, or flexures. Objective: Our purpose was to evaluate a prototype auxiliary imaging device that extends beyond the colonoscope's tip, providing a continuous retrograde view to detect lesions missed by the forward-viewing colonoscope. Design: Three anatomic models of the colon were prepared with simulated polyps, 32% in obvious locations and 68% on the proximal aspect of folds. Six endoscopists examined each model with two methods. Method A used a standard video colonoscope. Method B involved an identical colonoscope with a retrograde-viewing auxiliary device positioned within its instrument channel. Order of testing was randomized and blinded. Setting: Laboratory bench. Main Outcome Measurements: Detection rates for simulated polyps. Results: Of 78 "obvious" polyps, 69 (88%) and 70 (90%) were detected by methods A and B, respectively (P > .9). In contrast, of 162 polyps on proximal aspects of folds, 20 (12%) and 131 (81%) were detected by methods A and B, respectively (P < .00001). Limitations: Limitations resulted from (1) use of commercially available anatomic models in which haustral folds are less prominent and more rigid than in humans and (2) evaluation of a prototype device that had larger size and narrower angle of view than the planned production model and that was fixed in relation to the colonoscope. Conclusions: In simulated testing, a retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device used with a standard video colonoscope significantly improves detection rates of simulated polyps and promises to enhance the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in humans.
AB - Background: Colonoscopy is the "gold standard" for colorectal polyp and cancer detection, but important lesions may be missed on the proximal aspect of haustral folds, rectal valves, or flexures. Objective: Our purpose was to evaluate a prototype auxiliary imaging device that extends beyond the colonoscope's tip, providing a continuous retrograde view to detect lesions missed by the forward-viewing colonoscope. Design: Three anatomic models of the colon were prepared with simulated polyps, 32% in obvious locations and 68% on the proximal aspect of folds. Six endoscopists examined each model with two methods. Method A used a standard video colonoscope. Method B involved an identical colonoscope with a retrograde-viewing auxiliary device positioned within its instrument channel. Order of testing was randomized and blinded. Setting: Laboratory bench. Main Outcome Measurements: Detection rates for simulated polyps. Results: Of 78 "obvious" polyps, 69 (88%) and 70 (90%) were detected by methods A and B, respectively (P > .9). In contrast, of 162 polyps on proximal aspects of folds, 20 (12%) and 131 (81%) were detected by methods A and B, respectively (P < .00001). Limitations: Limitations resulted from (1) use of commercially available anatomic models in which haustral folds are less prominent and more rigid than in humans and (2) evaluation of a prototype device that had larger size and narrower angle of view than the planned production model and that was fixed in relation to the colonoscope. Conclusions: In simulated testing, a retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device used with a standard video colonoscope significantly improves detection rates of simulated polyps and promises to enhance the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in humans.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/33845476094
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/33845476094#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2006.07.044
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2006.07.044
M3 - Article
C2 - 17185094
AN - SCOPUS:33845476094
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 65
SP - 139
EP - 144
JO - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
IS - 1
ER -