Rex, Douglas K.Sagi, Sashidhar V.Kessler, William R.Rogers, Nicholas A.Fischer, MonikaBohm, Matthew E.Dewitt, John M.Lahr, Rachel E.Searight, Meghan P.Sullivan, Andrew W.McWhinney, Connor D.Garcia, Jonathan R.Broadley, Heather M.Vemulapalli, Krishna C.2019-09-092019-09-092019Rex, D. K., Sagi, S. V., Kessler, W. R., Rogers, N. A., Fischer, M., Bohm, M. E., … Vemulapalli, K. C. (2019). A comparison of 2 distal attachment mucosal exposure devices: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.06.046https://hdl.handle.net/1805/20882Background and Aims Endocuff and Endocuff Vision are effective mucosal exposure devices for improving polyp detection during colonoscopy. AmplifEYE is a knock-off device that appears similar to the Endocuff devices but has received minimal clinical testing. Methods We performed a randomized controlled clinical trial using a noninferiority design to compare Endocuff Vision with AmplifEYE. Results The primary endpoint of adenomas per colonoscopy was similar in AmplifEYE at 1.63 (2.83) versus 1.51 (2.29) with Endocuff Vision; p=0.535. The 95% lower confidence limit was 0.88 for ratio of means, establishing noninferiority of AmplifEYE (p=0.008). There was no difference between the arms in mean insertion time, and mean inspection time (withdrawal time minus polypectomy time and time for washing and suctioning) was shorter with AmplifEYE (6.8 minutes vs 6.9 minutes, p=0.042). Conclusions AmplifEYE is noninferior to Endocuff Vision for adenoma detection. The decision of which device to use can be based on cost. Additional comparisons of AmplifEYE to Endocuff by other investigators are warranted.enPublisher Policypolyp detectionadenomas per colonoscopyAmplifEYEArticle