A comparison of 2 distal attachment mucosal exposure devices: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorRex, Douglas K.
dc.contributor.authorSagi, Sashidhar V.
dc.contributor.authorKessler, William R.
dc.contributor.authorRogers, Nicholas A.
dc.contributor.authorFischer, Monika
dc.contributor.authorBohm, Matthew E.
dc.contributor.authorDewitt, John M.
dc.contributor.authorLahr, Rachel E.
dc.contributor.authorSearight, Meghan P.
dc.contributor.authorSullivan, Andrew W.
dc.contributor.authorMcWhinney, Connor D.
dc.contributor.authorGarcia, Jonathan R.
dc.contributor.authorBroadley, Heather M.
dc.contributor.authorVemulapalli, Krishna C.
dc.contributor.departmentMedicine, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-09T18:41:38Z
dc.date.available2019-09-09T18:41:38Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractBackground 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.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationRex, 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.2019.06.046en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/20882
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1016/j.gie.2019.06.046en_US
dc.relation.journalGastrointestinal Endoscopyen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourcePublisheren_US
dc.subjectpolyp detectionen_US
dc.subjectadenomas per colonoscopyen_US
dc.subjectAmplifEYEen_US
dc.titleA comparison of 2 distal attachment mucosal exposure devices: a noninferiority randomized controlled trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Rex_2019_comparison.pdf
Size:
2.95 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: