High-definition i-Scan colonoscopy is superior in the detection of diminutive polyps compared with high-definition white light colonoscopy: a prospective randomized-controlled trial

Does i-scan improve adenoma detection rate compared to high-definition colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Recent studies evaluated the impact of i-scan in improving the adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared to high-definition (HD) colonoscopy. We aimed to systematically review and analyze the impact of this technique. Methods  A thorough search of the following databases was undertaken: PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science. Full-text RCTs and cohort studies directly comparing i-scan and HD colonoscopy were deemed eligible for inclusion. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled and compared using random effects model and DerSimonian-Laird approach. For each outcome, relative risk (RR), 95 % confidence interval (CI), and P value was generated. P  < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results  A total of five studies with six arms were included in this analysis. A total of 2620 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.2 years and female proportion 44.8 %) completed the study and were included in our analysis. ADR was significantly higher with any i-scan (RR: 1.20, [CI: 1.06-1.34], P  = 0.003) compared to HD colonoscopy. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that ADR was significantly higher using i-scan with surface and contrast enhancement only (RR: 1.25, [CI: 1.07-1.47], P  = 0.004). Conclusions  i-scan has the potential to increase ADR using the surface and contrast enhancement method. Future studies evaluating other outcomes of interest such as proximal adenomas and serrated lesions are warranted.

Integrated Imaging Methodology Detects Claudin-1 Expression in Premalignant Nonpolypoid and Polypoid Colonic Epithelium in Mice

OBJECTIVES

Conventional colonoscopy with white light illumination detects colonic adenomas based on structural changes alone and is limited by a high miss rate. We aim to demonstrate an integrated imaging strategy that combines wide-field endoscopy and confocal endomicroscopy in real time to visualize molecular expression patterns in vivo to detect premalignant colonic mucosa.

METHODS

A peptide specific for claudin-1 is labeled with Cy5.5 and administrated intravenously in genetically engineered mice that develop adenomas spontaneously in the distal colon. Wide-field endoscopy is used to identify the presence of nonpolypoid and polypoid adenomas. Anatomic landmarks are used to guide placement of a confocal endomicroscope with side-view optics to visualize claudin-1 expression patterns with subcellular resolution.

RESULTS

Wide-field fluorescence images show peak uptake in colon adenoma at ∼1 hour after systemic peptide administration, and lesion margins are clearly defined. Further examination of the lesion using a confocal endomicroscope shows dysplastic crypts with large size, elongated shape, distorted architecture, and variable dimension compared with normal. The mean fluorescence intensity is significantly higher for dysplasia than normal. Increased claudin-1 expression in dysplasia vs normal is confirmed ex vivo, and the binding pattern is consistent with the in vivo imaging results.

DISCUSSION

Wide-field endoscopy can visualize molecular expression of claudin-1 in vivo to localize premalignant colonic mucosa, and confocal endomicroscopy can identify subcellular feature to distinguish dysplasia from normal.

Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of 1- to 5-mm versus 6- to 9-mm adenomas on the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The current guidelines recommend the same surveillance interval for ≥3 nonadvanced adenomas (NAAs), without discriminating between diminutive (1-5 mm) and small (6-9 mm) adenomas. Additionally, the same surveillance interval is recommended for patients with ≤2 diminutive NAAs and those with ≤2 small NAAs. However, it is questionable whether these recommendations are appropriate.

METHODS

We searched all relevant studies published through September 2019 that examined the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) according to the size (diminutive vs small) and the number of adenomas found during an index colonoscopy. Low-risk adenomas (LRAs) were subclassified into 2 categories (LRA-1, ≤2 diminutive NAAs; and LRA-2, ≤2 small NAAs), and high-risk adenomas (HRAs) were subclassified into 3 categories (HRA-1, ≥3 diminutive NAAs; HRA-2, ≥3 small NAAs; and HRA-3, advanced adenoma).

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 36,142 patients were evaluated. The LRA-2 group had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than the LRA-1 group (risk ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.81). Additionally, the HRA-2 and HRA-3 groups had a higher risk of metachronous ACRN than the HRA-1 group (hazard ratios [HRs], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.002-2.28] and 1.92 [95% CI, 1.11-3.33], respectively). However, there was no significant difference between the HRA-1 versus LRA-2 groups (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, .78-1.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the HRA and LRA groups, those with diminutive NAAs had a lower risk of metachronous ACRN than those with small NAAs. We believe that clinical guidelines should consider extending the surveillance intervals in patients with diminutive NAAs only.

Optical Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps: Recent Developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps has been recently proposed as an alternative to histopathologic diagnosis. Recent developments in imaging techniques, new classification systems, and the use of artificial intelligence have allowed for increased viability of optical diagnosis. This review provides an up-to-date overview of optical diagnosis recommendations, classifications, outcomes, and recent developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are currently seven major classification systems and three major society recommendations for quality benchmarks for optical diagnosis of diminutive polyps. The NICE classification has been extensively studied and meets quality benchmarks for most imaging techniques but does not allow for the diagnosis of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). The SIMPLE classification has met quality benchmarks for NBI and i-Scan and allows for the diagnosis of SSPs. Other classification systems need to be further studied to validate effectiveness. Computer-assisted diagnosis of colorectal polyps is a very promising recent development with first studies showing that society-recommended quality benchmarks for real-time colonoscopies on patients are being met. Limitations include a non-negligible percentage of failure to diagnose, low specificity, and low number of real-time diagnostic studies. More research needs to be performed to further understand the value of artificial intelligence for optical polyp diagnosis. Optical diagnosis of diminutive colorectal polyps is currently a viable strategy for experienced endoscopists using validated classifications and imaging-enhanced endoscopy. Artificial intelligence-based diagnosis could make optical diagnosis widely applicable but is currently in its early developmental stage.