Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 28, 2026; 32(12): 113927
Published online Mar 28, 2026. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v32.i12.113927
Published online Mar 28, 2026. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v32.i12.113927
Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Inclusion | Exclusion |
| (1) Ability to provide informed consent; (2) ≥ 18 years of age; (3) Undergoing a colonoscopy for screening or surveillance matters by a gastroenterologist | (1) Inability to provide consent; (2) Use of anticoagulation and anti-platelet agents that precludes the removal of polyps; (3) Prior history or current active inflammatory bowel disease; (4) History of polyposis syndromes or hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer; (5) Acute diverticulitis; (6) Previous colon surgery (excluding appendectomy); (7) Diagnosis of toxic megacolon; (8) Radiation therapy to abdomen or pelvis; (9) Pregnancy/lactation; (10) History of stroke or ischemia in previous 3 months; (11) Being deemed high risk by the performing endoscopist; (12) Fecal immunochemical test positive; and (13) Poor bowel prep (defined as abandoning the procedure prior to or inability to intubate the cecum) |
Table 2 Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of study participants by cohort, n (%)
| Category | Treatment cohort (n = 375) | Control cohort (n = 375) | Total (n = 750) |
| Age, years | |||
| 18-30 | 4 (1.1) | 4 (1.1) | 8 (1.1) |
| 31-50 | 88 (23.5) | 88 (23.5) | 176 (23.5) |
| 51-65 | 171 (45.6) | 171 (45.6) | 342 (45.6) |
| 66+ | 112 (29.9) | 112 (29.9) | 224 (29.9) |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 234 (62.4) | 218 (58.1) | 452 (60.3) |
| Female | 141 (37.6) | 157 (41.9) | 298 (39.7) |
| Time since last colonoscopy1, years | |||
| 0-5 | 278 (74) | 158 (74) | 436 (73.7) |
| 6-10 | 79 (21) | 38 (18) | 117 (19.8) |
| 10+ | 15 (4) | 15 (7) | 30 (5.1) |
| First colonoscopy | 143 (38) | 68 (18) | 211 (28.1) |
| Endoscopist distribution | |||
| Endoscopist A | 26 (7) | 49 (13) | 75 (10) |
| Endoscopist B | 203 (54) | 131 (35) | 334 (44.5) |
| Endoscopist C | 90 (24) | 120 (32) | 225 (30) |
| Endoscopist D | 105 (28) | 120 (32) | 225 (30) |
| Previous CRC | 3 (1) | 6 (2) | 9 (1.2) |
Table 3 Polyp detection rate by cohort and endoscopist, %
| Result | Treatment cohort (n = 375) | Control cohort (n = 375) | Percent change from control | P value |
| PDR | 88.3 | 72.3 | ||
| PDR by endoscopist | ||||
| Endoscopist A | 84 | 92 | 8.7% decrease | Not significant |
| Endoscopist B | 75 | 86 | 12.8% decrease | Significant (P < 0.01, Bonferroni-adjusted) |
| Endoscopist C | 63 | 86 | 26.7% decrease | Significant (P < 0.01, Bonferroni-adjusted) |
| Endoscopist D | 76 | 91 | 16.5% decrease | Significant (P < 0.01, Bonferroni-adjusted) |
Table 4 Tolerance of Endocuff-enhanced colonoscopy in the treatment cohort, n (%)
| Tolerance | Treatment cohort (n = 375) |
| Excellent | 355 (95) |
| Good | 16 (4) |
| Poor | 4 (1) |
- Citation: Dupuis O, Mavromatis S, Mavromatis A, Compas CN, Sabbagh C, Oliveira L, Hassard P. Endocuff Vision-enhanced colonoscopy: Does it improve polyp detection? World J Gastroenterol 2026; 32(12): 113927
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v32/i12/113927.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v32.i12.113927
