Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=84

High Definition Endoscopy With i-Scan for Small Colonic Polyp Evaluation: The HiScope Study

Colonic Polyps

Enrolled (actual)
84
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Apr 2013
Primary outcome: Primary: Diagnostic Accuracy of In-vivo Polyp Assessment — 93.3; 94.7 % diagnostic accuracy

Study Design & Population

Study type
Observational
Phase
N/A
Interventions
High definition white light endoscopy (Procedure)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 60+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust
Primary completion
May 2012

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Diagnostic Accuracy of In-vivo Polyp Assessment
93.3; 94.7
SECONDARY
Sensitivity for Adenomatous Histology of Colonic Polyps <10mm in Size
95.5; 97.0
SECONDARY
Specificity for Adenomatous Histology of Colonic Polyps <10mm in Size
89.3; 90.7
SECONDARY
Negative Predictive Value for Adenomatous Histology of Rectosigmoid Polyps ≤5mm in Size
100; 100

Summary

Current standard practice is to remove all colonic polyps found during colonoscopy as it has not been possible to distinguish between polyps with some malignant potential (adenomatous) and those with negligable malignant potential (non-adenomatous). Recent advances in endoscope imaging and technology have allowed endoscopists to distinguish between these two types of polyps by examining minute surface details. i-Scan is a new digital enhancement method that aims to enhance surface details and may enable similar accurate distinction between adenomatous and non-adenomatous polyps. Hypothesis: High definition white light endoscopy plus i-Scan improves diagnostic accuracy of in-vivo assessment of colonic polyps <10mm in size over high definition white light endoscopy alone.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Patients found to have colonic polyps up to 10mm in size

Exclusion Criteria

  • Poor bowel preparation
  • Inflammatory bowel disease
  • Polyposis syndrome
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01761279). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search