Adenoma detection with Endocuff colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonoscopy is the current reference standard for the detection of colorectal neoplasia, but nevertheless adenomas remain undetected. The Endocuff, an endoscopic cap with plastic projections, may improve colonic visualisation and adenoma detection. The aim of this study was to compare the mean number of adenomas per patient (MAP) and the adenoma detection rate (ADR) between Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and conventional colonoscopy (CC). METHODS: We performed a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in five hospitals and included fecal immonochemical test (FIT)-positive screening participants as well as symptomatic patients (>45 years). Consenting patients were randomised 1:1 to EAC or CC. All colonoscopies were performed by experienced colonoscopists (≥500 colonoscopies) who were trained in EAC. All colonoscopy quality indicators were prospectively recorded. FINDINGS: Of the 1063 included patients (52% male, median age 65 years), 530 were allocated to EAC and 533 to CC. More adenomas were detected with EAC, 722 vs 621, but the gain in MAP was not significant: on average 1.36 per patient in the EAC group versus 1.17 in the CC group (p=0.08). In a per-protocol analysis, the gain was 1.44 vs 1.19 (p=0.02), respectively. In the EAC group, 275 patients (52%) had one or more adenomas detected versus 278 in the CC group (52%; p=0.92). For advanced adenomas these numbers were 109 (21%) vs 117 (22%). The adjusted caecal intubation rate was lower with EAC (94% vs 99%; p<0.001), however when allowing crossover from EAC to CC, they were similar in both groups (98% vs 99%; p value=0.25). INTERPRETATION: Though more adenomas are detected with EAC, the routine use of Endocuff does not translate in a higher number of patients with one or more adenomas detected. Whether increased detection ultimately results in a lower rate of interval carcinomas is not yet known. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.trialregister.nl Dutch Trial Register: NTR3962.

Participation, yield, and interval carcinomas in three rounds of biennial FIT-based colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs based on the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is influenced by program adherence during consecutive screening rounds. We aimed to evaluate the participation rate, yield, and interval cancers in a third round of biennial CRC screening using FIT and to compare those with the first and the second screening round. METHODS: A total of 3566 average-risk individuals aged 50-75 years were invited to participate in a third round of biennial FIT-based CRC screening. All FIT positives were recommended to undergo colonoscopy. We merged our data with the national cancer registry in the Netherlands to identify all non-screen-detected cancers in our cohort. RESULTS: Of the invitees, 2142 (60%) returned the FIT in this third screening round, compared to 56% in the second round and 57% in the first round. Overall, 153 of the third-round participants (7.1%) had a positive FIT result, versus 7.9% in the second round and 8.1% in the first round (P=0.05). Of all FIT positives, 123 (80%) underwent colonoscopy. Within this group, 33 persons had advanced neoplasia. The predictive value of FIT positivity for advanced neoplasia was 27% (33/123), compared to 42% in the second round and 54% in the first round - a significant decline (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In an FIT-based screening program, participation rates remained stable over consecutive biennial screening rounds, while the FIT positivity rate and positive predictive value for advanced neoplasia gradually declined. Cancers in non-participants are significantly more advanced in staging than cancers in participants in the first round of screening.