Different techniques have been introduced to improve the endoscopist's view and enhance the detection of polyps. The endocuff is a polymer sleeve cap that is connected to the tip of the colonoscope in order to improve visualization of the mucosa during colonoscopy. The aim of the study was to compare adenoma detection rates (ADR) of endocuff-assisted colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy. Patients 50 years or older were randomized into two groups: an endocuff-assisted colonoscopy group and a conventional colonoscopy group without the endocuff. A total of 337 patients were included: 174 in the endocuff group and 163 in the conventional group. The median age was 61 years (interquartile range 55 - 70 years), and 74 % were women. The ADR was higher in the endocuff group than in the conventional group (22.4 % vs. 13.5 %; = 0.02). The mean number of adenomas was 0.30 (SD 0.25) in the endocuff group and 0.21 (SD 0.26) in the conventional group ( = 0.02). The rate of ileal intubation was lower in the endocuff group (73 % vs. 87 %; < 0.001). No serious adverse events occurred with the use of the endocuff. Endocuff colonoscopy achieved a greater ADR than conventional colonoscopy.Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC02387593).

No abstract

Background and study aimsPost-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is a complication associated with important morbidity, occasional mortality and high costs. Preventive strategies are suboptimal as PEP continues to affect 4% to 9% of patients. Spraying epinephrine on the papilla may decrease oedema and prevent PEP. This study aimed to compare rectal indomethacin plus epinephrine (EI) versus rectal indomethacin plus sterile water (WI) for the prevention of PEP.Patients and methodsThis multicentre randomised controlled trial included patients aged >18 years with an indication for ERCP and naive major papilla. All patients received 100 mg of rectal indomethacin and 10 mL of sterile water or a 1:10 000 epinephrine dilution. Patients were asked about PEP symptoms via telephone 24 hours and 7 days after the procedure. The trial was stopped half way through after a new publication reported an increased incidence of PEP among patients receiving epinephrine.ResultsOf the 3602 patients deemed eligible, 3054 were excluded after screening. The remaining 548 patients were randomised to EI group (n=275) or WI group (n=273). The EI and WI groups had similar baseline characteristics. Patients in the EI group had a similar incidence of PEP to those in the WI group (3.6% (10/275) vs 5.12% (14/273), p=0.41). Pancreatic duct guidewire insertion was identified as a risk factor for PEP (OR 4.38, 95% CI (1.44 to 13.29), p=0.009).ConclusionSpraying epinephrine on the papilla was no more effective than rectal indomethacin alone for the prevention of PEP.Trial registration numberThis study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02959112).

E. Diagnosis agreement between capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding at a referral center. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2015.

No abstract