Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wide Angle Endoscopes and Accessory Devices to Improve the Field of View

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Endoscopic Imaging Techniques and Tools

  • 677 Accesses

Abstract

Early detection and endoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps is mandatory to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, multiple studies indicate that a significant proportion of these lesions are missed during colonoscopy. Numerous colonoscopic techniques and technologies have been introduced in order to improve visualization of the colonic mucosa and optimize colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Herein, available data regarding recently developed wide angle endoscopes and accessory devices to improve the field of view are presented. Apparently, further high-quality studies are warranted to further elucidate their role in clinical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, et al. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:739–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gross CP, Andersen MS, Krumholz HM, et al. Relation between Medicare screening reimbursement and stage at diagnosis for older patients with colon cancer. JAMA. 2006;296:2815–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rim SH, Seeff L, Ahmed F, et al. Colorectal cancer incidence in the United States, 1999–2004: an updated analysis of data from the National Program of Cancer Registries and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Cancer. 2009;115:1967–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:343–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Huang Y, Gong W, Su B, et al. Risk and cause of interval colorectal cancer after colonoscopic polypectomy. Digestion. 2012;86:148–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Laiyemo AO, Doubeni C, Sanderson II AK, et al. Likelihood of missed and recurrent adenomas in the proximal versus the distal colon. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74:253–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Leufkens AM, DeMarco DC, Rastogi A, et al. Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:480–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Benson ME, Reichelderfer M, Said A, et al. Variation in colonoscopic technique and adenoma detection rates at an academic gastroenterology unit. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:166–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Long MD, Martin C, Sandler RS, et al. Reduced polyp detection as endoscopy shift progresses: experience with screening colonoscopy at a tertiary-care hospital. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2011;45:253–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kilgore TW, Abdinoor AA, Szary NM, et al. Bowel preparation with split-dose polyethylene glycol before colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:1240–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Triadafilopoulos G, Watts HD, Higgins J, et al. A novel retrograde-viewing auxiliary imaging device (Third Eye Retroscope) improves the detection of simulated polyps in anatomic models of the colon. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:139–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Triadafilopoulos G, Li J. A pilot study to assess the safety and efficacy of the Third Eye retrograde auxiliary imaging system during colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2008;40:478–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. DeMarco DC, Odstrcil E, Lara LF, et al. Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope study group. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:542–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Waye JD, Heigh RI, Fleischer DE, et al. A retrograde-viewing device improves detection of adenomas in the colon: a prospective efficacy evaluation (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:551–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Siersema PD, Rastogi A, Leufkens AM, et al. Retrograde-viewing device improves adenoma detection rate in colonoscopies for surveillance and diagnostic workup. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:3400–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gralnek IM, Carr-Locke DL, Segol O, et al. Comparison of standard forward-viewing mode versus ultrawide-viewing mode of a novel colonoscopy platform: a prospective, multicenter study in the detection of simulated polyps in an in vitro colon model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77:472–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gralnek IM, Segol O, Suissa A, et al. A prospective cohort study evaluating a novel colonoscopy platform featuring full-spectrum endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2013;45:697–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gralnek IM, Siersema PD, Halpern Z, et al. Standard forward-viewing colonoscopy versus full-spectrum endoscopy: an international, multicentre, randomised, tandem colonoscopy trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:353–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Hassan C, Gralnek IM. Cost-effectiveness of “full spectrum endoscopy” colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Dig Liver Dis. 2015;47(5):390–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hasan N, Gross SA, Gralnek IM, et al. A novel balloon colonoscope detects significantly more simulated polyps than a standard colonoscope in a colon model. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:1135–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gralnek IM, Suissa A, Domanov S. Safety and efficacy of a novel balloon colonoscope: a prospective cohort study. Endoscopy. 2014;46:883–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Halpern Z, Gross SA, Gralnek IM, et al. Comparison of adenoma detection and miss rates between a novel balloon colonoscope and standard colonoscopy: a randomized tandem study. Endoscopy. 2015;47:238–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Uraoka T, Tanaka S, Matsumoto T, et al. A novel extra-wide-angle-view colonoscope: a simulated pilot study using anatomic colorectal models. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77:480–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tsiamoulos ZP, Saunders BP. A new accessory, endoscopic cuff, improves colonoscopic access for complex polyp resection and scar assessment in the sigmoid colon (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:1242–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lenze F, Beyna T, Lenz P, et al. Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy: a new accessory to improve adenoma detection rate? Technical aspects and first clinical experiences. Endoscopy. 2014;46:610–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Biecker E, Floer M, Heinecke A, et al. Novel endocuff-assisted colonoscopy significantly increases the polyp detection rate: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015;49(5):413–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Floer M, Biecker E, Fitzlaff R, et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with endocuff-assisted colonoscopy—a randomized controlled multicenter trial. PLoS One. 2014;9, e114267.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, Bossuyt PM, et al. Adenoma detection with cap-assisted colonoscopy versus regular colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2012;61:1426–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kondo S, Yamaji Y, Watabe H, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:75–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rastogi A, Bansal A, Rao DS, et al. Higher adenoma detection rates with cap-assisted colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2012;61:402–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Park SM, Lee SH, Shin KY, et al. The cap-assisted technique enhances colonoscopy training: prospective randomized study of six trainees. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:2939–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee YT, Lai LH, Hui AJ, et al. Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:41–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lee YT, Hui AJ, Wong VW, et al. Improved colonoscopy success rate with a distally attached mucosectomy cap. Endoscopy. 2006;38:739–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rzouq F, Gupta N, Wani S, et al. Cap assisted colonoscopy for the detection of serrated polyps: a post-hoc analysis. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015;15:11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hewett DG, Rex DK. Cap-fitted colonoscopy: a randomized, tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72:775–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Harada Y, Hirasawa D, Fujita N, et al. Impact of a transparent hood on the performance of total colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:637–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Tee HP, Corte C, Al-Ghamdi H, et al. Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:3905–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Ng SC, Tsoi KK, Hirai HW, et al. The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in polyp detection and cecal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1165–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Morgan J, Thomas K, Lee-Robichaud H, et al. Transparent cap colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy to improve caecal intubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;12:CD008211.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ransohoff DF. What is the effect of more sensitive diagnostic technology? Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:256–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine and Research Unit, “Attikon” University General Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Ioannis S. Papanikolaou M.D., Ph.D., F.E.B.G.H.

  2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Peter D. Siersema M.D., Ph.D., F.A.S.G.E.

  3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, Nijmegen, GA 6525, The Netherlands

    Peter D. Siersema M.D., Ph.D., F.A.S.G.E.

Authors
  1. Ioannis S. Papanikolaou M.D., Ph.D., F.E.B.G.H.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter D. Siersema M.D., Ph.D., F.A.S.G.E.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter D. Siersema M.D., Ph.D., F.A.S.G.E. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Vani J.A. Konda

  2. Biological Sciences, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Irving Waxman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Papanikolaou, I.S., Siersema, P.D. (2016). Wide Angle Endoscopes and Accessory Devices to Improve the Field of View. In: Konda, V., Waxman, I. (eds) Endoscopic Imaging Techniques and Tools. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30053-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30053-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30053-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation