Loading clinical trials...
Loading clinical trials...
Showing 1-7 of 7 trials
NCT05141773
The main purpose of the study to evaluate the usefulness of the Endo-AID artificial intelligence system combined with endocuff compared with endocuff in the detection of colorectal adenomas in consecutive patients for outpatient colonoscopy. The secondary aims were: * To evaluate the benefit of Endo-AID and endocuff in adenoma detection rate by comparing endoscopists with high and low adenoma detection rate. * To evaluate serrated detection rate, advanced adenoma detection rate, adenoma detection rate according to the size (\<= 5mm, 6-9mm,\> = 10mm) and number of adenomas by colonoscopy. Stratification by location and morphology.
NCT03442738
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of ENDOCUFF VISION® (caps with soft, about 1 cm long lateral feet of rubber ("Endocuff") to flatten the colon folds) on ADR in a real-life setting (general practices) and in a homogenous patient collective (screening colonoscopies only). It is a prospective randomized multi centric study, with participation of at least 10 study sites (private practice). The study is an inverstigator-initiated trial (IIT). Depending on the randomization (closed envelope), the patients are examined with the standard instruments without or with ENDOCUFF VISION®. Group 1: screening colonoscopy with standard colonoscopes with ENDOCUFF VISION® Group 2: screening colonoscopy with standard colonoscopes without cap
NCT04945044
The main purpose of the study to evaluate the usefulness of the Endo-AID artificial intelligence system in the detection of colorectal adenomas in consecutive patients for outpatient colonoscopy. The secondary aims were: * To evaluate the benefit of Endo-AID in adenoma detection rate by comparing endoscopists with high and low adenoma detection rate. * To evaluate serrated detection rate, advanced adenoma detection rate, adenoma detection rate according to the size (\<= 5mm, 6-9mm,\> = 10mm) and number of adenomas by colonoscopy. Stratification by location and morphology.
NCT04963010
To evaluate the impact of second forward view examination of the proximal colon on adenoma detection rate Inclusion criteria：Patients ≥18 years of age undergoing screening, follow-up monitoring, and diagnostic colonoscopy Exclusion criteria：①Cecal intubation failed. ②Have a history of colorectal surgery. ③Insufficient bowel preparation, inadequate bowel preparation quality (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS)scores \< 2 in any segment of the colon). ④Inflammatory bowel disease or intestinal tuberculosis. ⑤Familial polyp syndrome. ⑥polyp retrieval failure. ⑦Patients with coagulation dysfunction. Patients ≥ 18 years of age who came to our hospital's Digestive Endoscopy Center for screening, follow-up monitoring and diagnosis of colonoscopy. After successfully insert the cecum, colonoscope withdrawal to the splenic flexure, all polyps found during the withdrawal process were resection,then they were randomized to standard withdrawal colonoscopy or second forward view according to the random number table (1:1) to perform.
NCT04472741
Retrospective data analysis of comparsion of 3 types of colonoscopes in daily practice (FUSE Full spectrum colonoscopy with 330° angle of view vs Pentax standard HD-colonoscopes and Pentax plus Endocuff): medical device of the category IIb (CE-marked device used within its intended purpose)
NCT04102631
Colonoscopy is a key technique in the detection and diagnosis of lower gastrointestinal diseases. High quality endoscopy results in better disease outcomes. However, the operant level of different endoscopists is significantly different.This study aims to construct a real-time quality monitoring system based on computer vision, named Endo.Angel, which is used to monitor the velocity of insertion of the endoscope, record the time of insertion and withdrawal of the endoscope, and remind endoscopists of the blind areas caused by intestinal segment slipping.
NCT03352700
In this randomized controlled study, consecutive outpatients scheduled for elective colonoscopy were randomized into two groups. Group A patients (n = 300) used only 3L PEG before colonoscopy. Patients in group B (n = 300) were additionally advised to Dyclonine Hydrochloride Mucilage plus 3L PEG, The overall quality of colonoscopy cleaning was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale by a single endoscopist who was blinded to the intervention. Visibility was blindly assessed for the amount of air bubbles and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Difficulty of procedure, and adverse events were also evaluated.