Standard-definition White-light, High-definition White-light versus Narrow-band Imaging Endoscopy for Detecting Colorectal Adenomas: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to compare the performance of standard-definition white-light endoscopy (SD-WL), high-definition white-light endoscopy (HD-WL), and high-definition narrow-band imaging (HD-NBI) in detecting colorectal lesions in the Chinese population.

Methods

This was a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Patients undergoing endoscopy for physical examination, screening, and surveillance were enrolled from July 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcome measure was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma detected. The associated factors for detecting adenomas were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

Out of 653 eligible patients enrolled, data from 596 patients were analyzed. The ADRs were 34.5% in the SD-WL group, 33.5% in the HD-WL group, and 37.5% in the HD-NBI group (P=0.72). The advanced neoplasm detection rates (ANDRs) in the three arms were 17.1%, 15.5%, and 10.4% (P=0.17). No significant differences were found between the SD group and HD group regarding ADR or ANDR (ADR: 34.5% vs. 35.6%, P=0.79; ANDR: 17.1% vs. 13.0%, P=0.16, respectively). Similar results were observed between the HD-WL group and HD-NBI group (ADR: 33.5% vs. 37.7%, P=0.45; ANDR: 15.5% vs. 10.4%, P=0.18, respectively). In the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, neither HD-WL nor HD-NBI led to a significant difference in overall adenoma detection compared to SD-WL (HD-WL: OR 0.91, P=0.69; HD-NBI: OR 1.15, P=0.80).

Conclusion

HD-NBI and HD-WL are comparable to SD-WL for overall adenoma detection among Chinese outpatients. It can be concluded that HD-NBI or HD-WL is not superior to SD-WL, but more effective instruction may be needed to guide the selection of different endoscopic methods in the future. Our study’s conclusions may aid in the efficient allocation and utilization of limited colonoscopy resources, especially advanced imaging technologies.

References

[1] SiegelRL, MillerKD, FuchsHE, et al.. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin, 2022, 7(1): 7-33

[2] ZhengRS, ZhangSW, ZengHM, et al.. Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2016. J Natl Cancer Cent, 2022, 2(1): 1-9

[3] BretthauerM, LøbergM, WieszczyP, et al.. Effect of Colonoscopy Screening on Risks of Colorectal Cancer and Related Death. N Engl J Med, 2022, 387(17): 1547-1556

[4] RexDK, SchoenfeldPS, CohenJ, et al.. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc, 2015, 81(1): 31-53

[5] KaminskiMF, Thomas-GibsonS, BugajskiM, et al.. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative. United European Gastroenterol J, 2017, 5(3): 309-334

[6] CrossAJ, RobbinsEC, SaundersBP, et al.. Higher Adenoma Detection Rates at Screening Associated With Lower Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2022, 20(2): e148-e167

[7] BadeK, MacPhailME, JohnsonCS, et al.. New colonoscope technology: impact on image capture and quality and on confidence and accuracy of endoscopy-based polyp discrimination. Endoscopy, 2014, 46(3): 172-178

[8] RastogiA, EarlyDS, GuptaN, et al.. Randomized, controlled trial of standard-definition white-light, high-definition white-light, and narrow-band imaging colonoscopy for the detection of colon polyps and prediction of polyp histology. Gastrointest Endosc, 2011, 74: 593-602

[9] AtkinsonN, KetS, BassettP, et al.. Narrow-Band Imaging for Detection of Neoplasia at Colonoscopy: A Meta-analysis of Data From Individual Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials. Gastroenterology, 2019, 157: 462-471

[10] MinamideT, SashiyamaH, MuramatsuY, et al.. Second-generation narrow-band imaging to detect colorectal adenomas: A prospective study including community hospitals. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 36: 3084-3091

[11] SiegelRL, MillerKD, WagleNS, et al.. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin, 2023, 73: 17-48

[12] ChenH, LuB, DaiM. Colorectal Cancer Screening in China: Status, Challenges, and Prospects - China, 2022. China CDC Wkly, 2022, 4: 322-328

[13] XinL, GaoY, ChengZ, et al.. Utilization and quality assessment of digestive endoscopy in China: results from 5-year consecutive nationwide surveys. Chin Med J (Engl), 2022, 135: 2003-2010

[14] EnserinkM. Bioethics. Helsinki’s new clinical rules: fewer placebos, more disclosure. Science, 2000, 290(5491): 418-419

[15] LaiEJ, CalderwoodAH, DorosG, et al.. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc, 2009, 69: 620-625

[16] Endoscopic Classification ReviewGroup. Update on the paris classification of superficial neoplastic lesions in the digestive tract. Endoscopy, 2005, 37(6): 570-578

[17] Lansdorp-VogelaarI, von KarsaL. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition—Introduction. Endoscopy, 2012, 44(Suppl3): SE15-30

[18] ZhaoS, YangX, WangS, et al.. Impact of 9-Minute Withdrawal Time on the Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2022, 20: e168-e181

[19] BaiY, FangJ, ZhaoSB, et al.. Impact of preprocedure simethicone on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: a multicenter, endoscopist-blinded randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy, 2018, 50: 128-136

[20] EastJE, StavrindisM, Thomas-GibsonS, et al.. A comparative study of standard vs. high definition colonoscopy for adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection with optimized withdrawal technique. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2008, 28: 768-776

[21] PashaSF, LeightonJA, DasA, et al.. Comparison of the yield and miss rate of narrow band imaging and white light endoscopy in patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy: a meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol, 2012, 107(3): 363-370

[22] ChungSJ, KimD, SongJH, et al.. Comparison of detection and miss rates of narrow band imaging, flexible spectral imaging chromoendoscopy and white light at screening colonoscopy: a randomised controlled back-to-back study. Gut, 2014, 63(5): 785-791

[23] TziatziosG, GkolfakisP, LazaridisLD, et al.. High-definition colonoscopy for improving adenoma detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. Gastrointest Endosc, 2020, 91: 1027-1036.e9

[24] JrebiNY, HeftyM, JaloutaT, et al.. High-definition colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31: 78-84

[25] LeungWK, LoOS, LiuKS, et al.. Detection of colorectal adenoma by narrow band imaging (HQ190) vs. high-definition white light colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol, 2014, 109(6): 855-863

[26] ClarkBT, ProtivaP, NagarA, et al.. Quantification of Adequate Bowel Preparation for Screening or Surveillance Colonoscopy in Men. Gastroenterology, 2016, 150: 396-405

[27] TarhiniH, AlrazimA, GhusnW, et al.. Impact of sedation type on adenoma detection rate by colonoscopy. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol, 2022, 46: 101981

[28] CoghlanE, LaferrereL, ZenonE, et al.. Timed screening colonoscopy: a randomized trial of two colonoscopic withdrawal techniques. Surg Endosc, 2020, 34: 1200-1205

[29] CalderwoodAH, ThompsonKD, SchroyPC3rd, et al.. Good is better than excellent: bowel preparation quality and adenoma detection rates. Gastrointest Endosc, 2015, 81: 691-699