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

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.

Safe and effective hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection with ALL IN ONE snare in porcine gastric model (with video).

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (H-ESD) using a newly developed ALL IN ONE (AIO) snare. This was a matched control study in a porcine model. Five paired simulated stomach lesions 2-2.5 cm in size were removed by H-ESD using an AIO snare or conventional ESD (C-ESD) using an endoscopic knife. The outcomes of the two procedures were compared, including en-bloc resection rates, procedure times, intraprocedural bleeding volumes, muscular injuries, perforations, thicknesses of the submucosal layer in resected specimens, and stomach defects. All simulated lesions were resected en-bloc. Specimens resected by H-ESD and C-ESD were similar in size (7.68 ± 2.92 vs. 8.42 ± 2.42 cm2; P = 0.676). H-ESD required a significantly shorter procedure time (13.39 ± 3.78 vs. 25.99 ± 4.52 min; P = 0.031) and submucosal dissection time (3.99 ± 1.73 vs. 13.1 ± 4.58 min; P = 0.003) versus C-ESD; H-ESD also yielded a faster dissection speed (241.37 ± 156.84 vs. 68.56 ± 28.53 mm2/min; P = 0.042) and caused fewer intraprocedural bleeding events (0.40 ± 0.55 vs. 3.40 ± 1.95 times/per lesion; P = 0.016) than C-ESD. The thicknesses of the submucosal layer of the resected specimen (1190.98 ± 134.07 vs. 1055.90 ± 151.76 µm; P = 0.174) and the residual submucosal layer of the stomach defect (1607.94 ± 1026.74 vs. 985.98 ± 445.58 µm; P = 0.249) were similar with both procedures. The AIO snare is a safe and effective device for H-ESD and improves the treatment outcomes of gastric lesions by shortening the procedure time.

Endoscopic resection of gastric low-grade dysplasia with high risk factors is associated with decreased advanced neoplasia: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The natural course of gastric low-grade dysplasia (LGD) remains unclear, and there are inconsistent management recommendations among guidelines and consensus. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the incidence of advanced neoplasia in patients with gastric LGD and identify the related risk factors. METHODS: Cases of biopsy demonstrated LGD (BD-LGD) at our center from 2010 to 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Risk factors related to histological progression were identified, and outcomes of patients based on risk stratification were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-seven (23.0%) of 421 included BD-LGD lesions were diagnosed as advanced neoplasia. Among 409 superficial BD-LGD lesions, lesion in the upper third of the stomach, H. pylori infection, larger size, and narrow band imaging (NBI)-positive findings were independent risk factors of progression. NBI-positive lesions and NBI-negative lesions with or without other risk factors had 44.7%, 1.7%, and 0.0% risk of advanced neoplasia, respectively. Invisible lesions, visible lesions (VLs) without a clear margin, and VLs with a clear margin and size ≤ 10 mm, or > 10 mm had 4.8%, 7.9%, 16.7%, and 55.7% risk of advanced neoplasia, respectively. In addition, endoscopic resection decreased the risk of cancer (P < 0.001) and advanced neoplasia (P < 0.001) in patients with NBI-positive lesions, but not in NBI-negative patients. Similar results were found in patients with VLs with clear margin and size > 10 mm. Moreover, NBI-positive lesions had higher sensitivity and lower specificity for predicting advanced neoplasia than VLs with a clear margin and size > 10 mm determined by white-light endoscopy (97.6% vs. 62.7%, P < 0.001; and 63.0% vs. 85.6%, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Progression of superficial BD-LGD is associated with NBI-positive lesions, as well as with VLs with a clear margin (size > 10 mm) if NBI is unavailable, and selective resection of those lesions offers benefits for patients by decreasing the risk of advanced neoplasia.