Usefulness and safety of new ultrasmall-diameter colonoscope for cases with difficult insertion: a retrospective study.

Colonoscopies are widely available, but there are cases where insertion can be difficult, even for experienced endoscopists. EC-760XP/L, a new ultrasmall-diameter long scope, may be useful in such cases. This single-center retrospective study included 39 cases where colonoscope insertion was difficult even when previously conducted by an experienced endoscopist. The primary outcome was the cecal intubation time using EC-760XP/L compared to the time used in a previous examination with a standard scope. The secondary outcomes were the cecum intubation rate, intestinal cleanliness level, adenoma detection rate, polyp detection rate, sedative use rate, occurrence of adverse events, and pain experience. A comparison of cecal intubation times between EC-760XP/L and the standard scope showed that insertion times were significantly lower with EC-760XP/L (9.5 min) compared to the standard scope (19 min) (p < 0.01). The standard scope achieved cecal intubation in 30 cases (76.9%), whereas EC-760XP/L reached the cecum in all cases (p < 0.01). Pain was observed in 3 cases (8.3%) with the EC-760XP/L, which was significantly lower than the 22 cases (56.4%) with the standard scope (p < 0.01). In conclusion, EC-760XP/L proved to be useful in cases where colonoscope insertion was difficult.

A Pressure Sensing Device to Assist in Colonoscopic Procedures to Prevent Perforation-A Case Study.

Colonoscopy has a limited field of view because it relies solely on a small camera attached to the end of the scope and a screen displayed on a monitor. Consequently, the quality and safety of diagnosis and treatment depend on the experience and skills of the gastroenterologist. When a novice attempts to insert the colonoscope during the procedure, excessive pressure can sometimes be applied to the colon wall. This pressure can cause a medical accident known as colonic perforation, which the physician should prevent. We propose an assisting device that senses the pressure applied to the colon wall, analyzes the risk of perforation, and warns the physician in real time. Flexible pressure sensors are attached to the surface of the colonoscope shaft. These sensors measure pressure signals during a colonoscopy procedure. A simple signal processor is used to collect and process the pressure signals. In the experiment, a colonoscope equipped with the proposed device was inserted into a simulated colon made from a colon extracted from a pig. The processed data were visually communicated to the gastroenterologist via displays and light-emitting diodes (LEDs). The device helps the physician continuously monitor and prevent excessive pressure on the colon wall. In this experiment, the device appropriately generated and delivered warnings to help the physicians prevent colonic perforation. In the future, the device is to be improved, and more experiments will be performed in live swine models or humans to confirm its efficacy and safety.

Is appendoscope a new option for the treatment of acute appendicitis?

Acute appendicitis is a common surgical emergency. It is commonly caused by obstruction of the appendiceal lumen due to fecaliths, tumors, or lymphoid hyperplasia. For over a century, appendectomy has been the primary treatment for acute appendicitis. Abraham Groves performed the first open appendectomy in 1883. In 1983, Kurt Semm completed the first laparoscopic appendectomy, heralding a new era in appendectomy. However, appendectomy is associated with certain complications and a rate of negative appendectomies. Studies have suggested controversy over the impact of appendectomy on the development of inflammatory bowel disease and Parkinson's disease, but an increasing number of studies indicate a possible positive correlation between appendectomy and colorectal cancer, gallstones, and cardiovascular disease. With the recognition that the appendix is not a vestigial organ and the advancement of endoscopic te-chnology, Liu proposed the endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy. It is an effective minimally invasive alternative for treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Our team has developed an appendoscope with a disposable digital imaging system operated through the biopsy channel of a colonoscope and successfully applied it in the treatment of appendicitis. This article provides an overview of the progress in endoscopic treatment for acute appendicitis and offers a new perspective on the future direction of appendiceal disease treatment.

G-EYE Improves Polyp, Adenoma, and Serrated Polyp Detection Rates in Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the gold-standard test to decrease mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC). G-EYE is an inflated balloon on the bending section of the scope with the ability to flatten the folds to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of G-EYE in improving ADR and other quality indicators of colonoscopy. METHODS: A literature search was performed through March 21, 2023, on databases including Embase, Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science Core Collection, KCI-Korean Journal Index, and Global Index Medicus. Core concepts of G-EYE, colonoscopy, ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR), and withdrawal time were searched. Statistical analysis was performed with OpenMeta[Analyst]. The odds ratio (OR) for the proportional variable and mean difference for the continuous variable along with 95% CI was used with a P-value <0.05 considered statistically significant. We used the DerSimonian-Laird method and random effects model for pooling data. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded a total of 143 articles. Three studies with 3868 total colonoscopies were finalized. The pooled ADR, PDR, and SPDR showed statistical improvement with G-EYE (OR: 1.744, 95% CI: 1.534-1.984, P<0.001; OR: 1.766, 95% CI: 1.547-2.015, P<0.001; and OR: 1.603, 95% CI: 1.176-2.185, P=0.003). The withdrawal time was also noted to be higher in the G-EYE group (mean difference: 0.114, CI: 0.041-0.186, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that G-EYE can improve ADR, PDR, and SPDR. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of G-EYE on interval CRC and mortality rate.

MorphGI: A Self-Propelling Soft Robotic Endoscope Through Morphing Shape.

Colonoscopy is currently the best method for detecting bowel cancer, but fundamental design and construction have not changed significantly in decades. Conventional colonoscope (CC) is difficult to maneuver and can lead to pain with a risk of damaging the bowel due to its rigidity. We present the MorphGI, a robotic endoscope system that is self-propelling and made of soft material, thus easy to operate and inherently safe to patient. After verifying kinematic control of the distal bending segment, the system was evaluated in: a benchtop colon simulator, using multiple colon configurations; a colon simulator with force sensors; and surgically removed pig colon tissue. In the colon simulator, the MorphGI completed a colonoscopy in an average of 10.84 min. The MorphGI showed an average of 77% and 62% reduction in peak forces compared to a CC in high- and low-stiffness modes, respectively. Self-propulsion was demonstrated in the excised tissue test but not in the live pig test, due to anatomical differences between pig and human colons. This work demonstrates the core features of MorphGI.

Towards Semi-Autonomous Colon Screening Using an Electromagnetically Actuated Soft-Tethered Colonoscope Based on Visual Servo Control.

OBJECTIVE: Conventional colonoscopy using a flexible colonoscope remains two major limitations, including patient discomfort and difficult manipulations for surgeons. Robotic colonoscopes have been developed to conduct colonoscopy in a patient-friendly manner. However, most robotic colonoscopes still maintain nonintuitive and difficult manipulations, which limits their clinical applications. In this paper, we demonstrated visual servo-based semi-autonomous manipulations of an electromagnetic actuated soft-tethered (EAST) colonoscope, which aims to lower difficulties of robotic colonoscope manipulations. METHODS: Kinematic modeling of EAST colonoscope is conducted, with an adaptive visual servo controller established. Template matching method and a lumen and polyp detection model are developed to enable semi-autonomous manipulations, including region-of-interest automatic tracking and autonomous navigation with automatic polyp detection. RESULTS: The EAST colonoscope demonstrates visual servoing with an average convergence time of around 2.5 s and performs disturbance rejection within 3.0 s. Semi-autonomous manipulations were conducted in both a commercialized colonoscopy simulator and an ex-vivo porcine colon to show the efficacy of reducing the user workload compared to manual control. CONCLUSION: The EAST colonoscope can perform visual servoing and semi-autonomous manipulations with the developed methods in both laboratory and ex-vivo environments. SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed solutions and techniques improve the autonomy level of robotic colonoscopes and reduce user workloads, which promotes the development and clinical translation of robotic colonoscopy.

Utility of a Passive Bending Colonoscope for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The utility of a passive bending colonoscope (PBCS) in ERCP for patients with surgically altered anatomy has not been established. This study compared the outcome of PBCS-ERCP and balloon-assisted enteroscope (BAE)-ERCP. METHODS: This multicenter observational study included 343 patients with surgically altered anatomy who underwent ERCP. Among these, 110 underwent PBCS-ERCP and 233 underwent BAE-ERCP. Propensity score matching was applied, and a final cohort of 210 (105 in each group) with well-balanced backgrounds was analyzed. The primary outcome was the success rate of reaching anastomosis or ampulla of Vater. Secondary endpoints included the cannulation success rate, completion rate, procedure time (to reach, cannulate, complete), and adverse events. RESULTS: The success rate for reaching the target was 91.4% (96/105) with PBCS and 90.5% (95/105) with BAE (odds ratio [95% CI] 1.12, [0.44-2.89], P = 0.809). The mean time required to reach the target was significantly shorter in PBCS: 10.04 min (SD, 9.62) with PBCS versus 18.77 min (SD, 13.21) with BAE (P < 0.001). There were no differences in the success of cannulation or procedure completion, although the required times for cannulation and procedure completion were significantly shorter in PBCS. The incidence of adverse events was significantly higher in BAE (19.0%) than in PBCS (4.8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with surgically altered anatomy, PBCS-ERCP showed promising results with shorter time to reach, cannulate, and a lower incidence of adverse events compared with BAE-ERCP. The success rate of reaching was favorable through PBCS compared with BAE. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000045546.

Comparison of the characteristics of the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI colonoscopes in non-sedated patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this randomized controlled study was to compare the characteristics of the CF-H290I (high-definition) colonoscope with those of the PCF-Q260JI (high-resolution) colonoscope in non-sedated patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery in an effort to help endoscopists to select more effectively and objectively between the various colonoscopes. METHODS: A total of 397 patients who underwent colonoscopy at the Affiliated Wuxi People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, between August 2022 and October 2022 were randomized to a CF-H290I group (n = 198) or a PCF-Q260JI group (n = 199) using a computer-generated allocation method. We compared the adenoma detection rate (ADR), patient satisfaction with the examination, discomfort associated with colonoscopy including abdominal distension and pain, cecal intubation time, and patient willingness to undergo colonoscopy in the future between the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI groups. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the overall ADR between the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI groups (81 [40.9%] vs 63 [31.7%], Z = 3.674, P = 0.055). However, the ADRs in the transverse colon and left colon were significantly higher in the CF-H290I group (22 [11.1%] vs 6 [3.0%], Z = 9.588, P = 0.002 and 57 [28.8%] vs 37 [18.6%], Z = 5.212, P = 0.017, respectively). More sessile serrated lesions were detected in the CF-H290I group (52 [26.3] vs 30 [15.1%], Z = 7.579, P = 0.006). Patient satisfaction with colonoscopy was better in the PCF-Q260JI group (8.91 ± 1.09 vs 8.51 ± 1.44, t = -3.158, P < 0.01) with less likelihood of discomfort (23 [11.6%] vs 41 [20.7%], Z = 6.144, P = 0.013), The number of patients willing to undergo colonoscopy in the future was significantly greater in the PCF-Q260JI group (168 [84.4%] vs 149 [75.3%], Z = 5.186, P = 0.023). The cecal intubation time was significantly shorter in the CF-H290I group (256.09 ± 155.70 s vs 315.64 ± 171.64 s, P = 0.004). There were no complications such as perforation or bleeding in either group. CONCLUSION: The CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI colonoscopes each have advantages when used in patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery. The CF-H290I has higher ADRs in the transverse and left colon whereas the PCF-Q260JI is less painful and better accepted by patients. This study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Wuxi People's Hospital and was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200063092).

Robotic endoscope with double-balloon and double-bend tube for colonoscopy.

The insertion of conventional colonoscopes can sometimes cause patients to experience pain during the procedure owing to the stretching of the mesentery. In this study, a prototype of a robotic colonoscope with a double-balloon and double-bend tube based on the conventional double-balloon endoscope was developed to simplify insertion and prevent the overstretching of the colon. Both the outer and inner tubes were confirmed to be free from interference from wires and sheaths. Additionally, all functions such as tip bending, inflation and deflation of the balloons, and actuator-driven pulling and pushing of the inner tube were operated properly. During the insertion test, the device could be reached the cecum of a colon model in approximately 442 s when operated by a non-medical operator. In addition, the device did not overstretch the colon model, thereby suggesting that the insertion mechanism can follow the shape of the colon model. As a result, the developed mechanism has the potential to navigate through a highly-bent colon without overstretching.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for colonoscopic perforation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of laparoscopic surgery (LS) for the treatment of colonoscopic perforation is still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of LS versus open surgery (OS) for colonoscopic perforation. METHODS: All clinical trials that compared laparoscopic with OS for colonoscopic perforation published in English were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library searches. A modified scale was used to assess the quality of the literature. We analyzed the age, sex ratio, aim of colonoscopy, history of abdominopelvic surgery, type of procedure, size of perforation, operation time, postoperative fasting time, hospital stay, postoperative complication morbidity, and postoperative mortality. Meta-analyses were performed using weighted mean differences for continuous variables, and odds ratios for dichotomous variables. RESULTS: No eligible randomized trials were identified, but eleven nonrandomized trials were analyzed. In the pooled data of 192 patients who underwent LS and 131 OS, there were no significant differences in age, sex ratio, aim of colonoscopy, history of abdominopelvic surgery, perforation size, and operative time between the groups. LS group had shorter time of hospital stay and postoperative fasting time, less postoperative complication morbidity, but there were no significant difference in postoperative mortality rate between LS group and OS group. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current meta-analysis, we conclude that LS is a safe and efficacious technique for colonoscopic perforation, with fewer postoperative complications, less hospital mortality, and faster recovery compared with OS.

"Transanal endoscopic microsurgery" with a flexible colonoscope (F-TEM): a new endoscopic treatment for suspicious deep submucosal invasion T1 rectal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic techniques allow resections of deep submucosal invasion rectal carcinoma, but mostly are facing issues such as costs, follow-up care or size limit. Our aim was to design a new endoscopic technique, which retains the advantages over surgical resections while eliminating the disadvantages mentioned above. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We propose a technique for the resection of the superficial rectal tumours, with highly suspicious deep submucosal invasion. It combines steps of endoscopic submucosal dissection, muscular resection and edge-to-edge suture of the muscular layers, finally performing the equivalent of a "transanal endoscopic microsurgery" with a flexible colonoscope (F-TEM). RESULTS: A 60-year-old patient was referred to our unit, following the discovery of a 15 mm distal rectum adenocarcinoma. The computed tomography and the endoscopic ultrasound examination revealed a T1 tumour, without secondary lesions. Considering that the initial endoscopic evaluation highlighted a depressed central part of the lesion, with several avascular zones, an F-TEM was performed, without severe complication. The histopathological examination revealed negative resection margins, without risk factors for lymph node metastasis, no adjuvant therapy being proposed. CONCLUSION: F-TEM allows endoscopic resection of highly suspicious deep submucosal invasion T1 rectal carcinoma and it proves to be a feasible alternative to surgical resection or other endoscopic treatments as endoscopic submucosal dissection or intermuscular dissection.

A retrospective study of colonoscopic surveillance in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ) guidelines suggest surveillance colonoscopy should be carefully considered after age 75. The authors noted a cluster of patients presenting in their 8th and 9th decade of life with a new colorectal cancer (CRC) having previously been declined surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS: A 7-year retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent a colonoscopy aged between 71 and 75 years in the period between 2006 and 2012. Kaplan-Meier graphs were created with survival measured from the time of index colonoscopy. Log rank tests were used to determine any difference in survival distribution. Relative risk (RR) was calculated, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported. RESULTS: A total of 623 patients met inclusion criteria; 461 (74%) had no indication for surveillance colonoscopy and 162 (26%) had an indication. Of the 162 patients with an indication, 91 (56.2%) underwent surveillance colonoscopies after the age of 75. Twenty-three (3.7%) patients were diagnosed with a new CRC. Eighteen (78.2%) patients diagnosed with a new CRC underwent surgery. The median survival overall was 12.9 years (95% CI 12.2-13.5). This did not differ between patients with (13.1, 95% CI 12.1-14.1) or without (12.6, 95% CI 11.2-14.0) an indication for surveillance. CONCLUSION: This study found one quarter of patients who had a colonoscopy between the ages of 71-75 had an indication for surveillance colonoscopy. Most patients with a new CRC underwent surgery. This study suggests it may be appropriate to update the AoNZ guidelines and consider adopting a risk stratification tool to aid decision making.

Comparison of adenoma detection rate between high-definition colonoscopes with different fields of view: 170 degrees versus 140 degrees.

In newer generation colonoscopes, the field of view (FOV) varies approximately between 170° and 140°, depending on the type of colonoscopy. To the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated whether the visual field difference of the colonoscope affects quality indicators, such as the adenoma detection rate (ADR), without using additional devices to expand the FOV in colonoscopes with the same resolution. This study aimed to investigate the difference in quality indicators, such as ADR, between 170° and 140° FOV in colonoscopes with the same high-definition resolution. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent screening or surveillance colonoscopy at the Dong-A University Hospital in Busan, South Korea, between March 2021 and February 2022. We calculated the overall ADR ratios for patients who underwent colonoscopy with 140° and 170° FOV. Polyp detection rate (PDR), sessile serrated PDR, and advanced neoplasia detection rate were calculated for each group. Factors associated with adenoma detection were identified using a logistical regression analysis. A total of 1711 patients were included in the study (838 patients in the 170° group and 873 patients in the 140° group). ADR (43.79 vs 41.92%, P = .434) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. The generational differences were not statistically significant either for PDR (56.44 vs 53.49%, P = .220), sessile serrated PDR (1.19 vs 0.92%, P = .575), or advanced neoplasia detection rate (5.00 vs 4.58%, P = .735). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that, age, male sex, and long withdrawal time were the most significant factors affecting adenoma detection. This study revealed that there were no differences in ADR while employing high definition colonoscopes with a 170° FOV and a 140° FOV.

Effect of an automated flexible endoscope channel brushing system on improving reprocessing quality: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Qualified reprocessing, of which meticulous channel brushing is the most crucial step, is essential for prevention and control of endoscopy-associated infections. However, channel brushing is often omitted in practice. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an automated flexible endoscope channel brushing system (AECBS) on improving the quality of endoscope reprocessing. METHODS: This prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted between 24 November 2021 and 22 January 2022 at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China. Eligible endoscopes were randomly allocated to the auto group (channels brushed by AECBS) or the manual group (channels brushed manually), with sampling and culturing after high-level disinfection and drying. The primary end point was the proportion of endoscopes with positive cultures. RESULTS: 204 endoscopes in the auto group and 205 in the manual group were analyzed. The proportion of endoscopes with positive cultures was significantly lower in the auto group (15.2 % [95 %CI 10.7 %-21.0 %]) than in the manual group (23.4 % [95 %CI 17.9 %-29.9 %]). CONCLUSIONS: AECBS could effectively reduce bioburden and improve reprocessing quality of gastroscopes and colonoscopes. AECBS has the potential to replace manual brushing and lower the risk of endoscopy-associated infections, providing a new option for the optimization of reprocessing.

The effect of the endoscopic device Endocuff™/Endocuff vision™ on quality standards in colonoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

AIM: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality measure, with a high ADR reflecting high-quality colonoscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of Endocuff™/Endocuff Vision™-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) versus standard colonoscopy (SC) on ADR and other clinical, patient and resource-use outcomes. METHOD: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for full papers reporting randomized studies comparing EAC with SC. The primary outcome was ADR. Secondary outcomes comprised key polyp/adenoma detection, procedure-related, patient-related and health economic measures. Random effects meta-analyses provided pooled estimates of outcomes [risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI)]. RESULTS: Twelve parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three crossover RCTs with data on 9140 patients were included. EAC significantly increased the ADR (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09-1.29), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP) (MD 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.33), polyp detection rate (PDR) (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.10-1.30) and mean polyps per procedure (MPP) (MD 0.39, 95% CI 0.14-0.63) versus SC. EAC significantly increased segmental PDR versus SC in the sigmoid (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.64-2.49), transverse (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.09-2.42), ascending (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.26-2.41) and caecal segments (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.29-2.82). Procedure-related variables did not differ between arms. There were insufficient data for meta-analysis of health economic or patient-centred outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: EAC increased ADR, MAP, PDR and MPP versus SC without detrimental effects on procedure measures. Cost-effectiveness and patient experience data are lacking and would be valuable to inform practice recommendations.