Does Inspection During Insertion Improve Adenoma Yields During Colonoscopy?

NCT ID: NCT01035775

Last Updated: 2018-11-16

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

340 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2009-12-31

Study Completion Date

2011-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Colonoscopy is not a perfect test. It misses a substantial number of neoplastic lesions and has some risk of missing cancer. Nearly all work on detection during colonoscopy has focused on the withdrawal phase of the examination. This randomized, controlled trial will compare the additional effect on the rate of adenoma detection of mucosal inspection during colonoscope insertion, with inspection during instrument withdrawal, in patients undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Background: Colonoscopy is not a perfect test. It misses a substantial number of neoplastic lesions and has some risk of missing cancer. Nearly all work on detection during colonoscopy has focused on the withdrawal phase of the examination. Thus, colonoscopy is typically performed by rapidly passing the instrument through the loops and bends of the colon in order to reach the tip of the cecum, and then performing a slow withdrawal in which the tip of the instrument is systematically deflected, and the mucosa is careful cleaned and suctioned, to expose all of the colonic mucosa for viewing.

Many experienced colonoscopists recognize that small polyps seen incidentally but not removed during insertion are sometimes quite difficult to find during withdrawal. The reason for this observation is probably because the colon is in a very different anatomical conformation during endoscope insertion and withdrawal. During insertion, the colon is in its natural conformation in which the sigmoid and transverse colon has several sharp bends or flexures, and the overall length has not yet been shortened. In this phase, the colon is often significantly stretched because of the formation of loops and bends in the colonoscope. This greatly affects the conformation of the colonic wall visualized proximal to the instrument tip. During withdrawal, the colon is shortened and pleated over the colonoscope, with successive regions of the colon being inspected as they slip off the end of the instrument. Thus, segments of visualized colon are often much straighter during withdrawal than during insertion. The insertion and withdrawal phases, therefore, expose somewhat different sections of the mucosal surface to the colonoscope and inspection on insertion and withdrawal are, quite possibly, complementary.

Aims: This randomized, controlled trial will compare the additional effect on the rate of adenoma detection of mucosal inspection during colonoscope insertion, with inspection during instrument withdrawal, in patients undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening or surveillance.

Study procedure: In this study, we plan to investigate whether a specified interval of inspection during insertion can increase overall adenoma detection. We will conduct a randomized controlled trial, in which patients will be randomized to have all of the inspection performed during the withdrawal phase (as is usual care) versus having several minutes of examination specifically devoted to inspection during insertion.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Colorectal Cancer Colorectal Polyps

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Insertion

Inspection on colonoscope insertion in addition to inspection during withdrawal from the cecum.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Inspection during insertion

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

The colonic mucosa will be inspected for lesions during insertion of the instrument, and during withdrawal of the instrument.

Withdrawal

Inspection during withdrawal (usual care) without deliberate inspection during insertion.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Inspection during withdrawal

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

The colonic mucosa will be inspected for lesions only during withdrawal of the instrument from the cecum. The instrument will be inserted to the cecum without deliberate inspection.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Inspection during insertion

The colonic mucosa will be inspected for lesions during insertion of the instrument, and during withdrawal of the instrument.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Inspection during withdrawal

The colonic mucosa will be inspected for lesions only during withdrawal of the instrument from the cecum. The instrument will be inserted to the cecum without deliberate inspection.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Age ≥ 50 years
* Patients undergoing colonoscopy for screening or surveillance indications

Exclusion Criteria

* Previous surgical resection of all or part of the colon.
* Inability to give informed consent.
* Ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease.
* Polyposis syndrome or Lynch syndrome (HNPCC)
* Any comorbid condition which the investigator deems would put the patient at increased risk from a slightly prolonged procedure
Minimum Eligible Age

50 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Indiana University School of Medicine

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Douglas K. Rex

Douglas K. Rex, MD

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Douglas K Rex, M.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Indiana University School of Medicine

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Indiana University Hospital

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Beltway Surgery Center

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Hewett DG, Rex DK. Inspection on instrument insertion during colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Aug;76(2):381-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.454.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 22817789 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

0909-22

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.