Active clinical trials for "Colonic Polyps"

EndoVigilant software device augments existing colonoscopy procedure video in real-time by highlighting colon polyps and mucosal abnormalities. It is intended to assist gastroenterologists in detection of adenomas and serrated polyps. The device is an adjunctive tool and is not intended to replace physicians' decision making related to detection, diagnosis or treatment. This study with an adaptive design measures the clinical benefit (increase in detection of adenomatous and serrated polyps) and increased risk (increased extraction of non-adenomas) during standard colonoscopy procedures when EndoVigilant software device is used.

To conduct an single blinded, non-randomized, prospective, single center trial to validate the performance of a novel state-of-the-art Artificial Intelligence model (AI-Model) for colorectal lesion detection during routine diagnostic colonoscopy and to evaluate its feasibility in daily endoscopy. Consecutive patients referred for a screening, surveillance or diagnostic colonoscopy will be included

This is a single centre, non-randomized, tandem colonoscopy trial of the NISInspire-C System, followed immediately by a conventional colonoscope (CC). Each trial subject will undergo colonoscopy using the NISInspire-C system, followed immediately by CC. The purpose of this study is to obtain observational data on the safety profile, feasibility and usability of the NISInspire-C System in performing diagnostic colonoscopy in human subjects. The level of procedural pain experienced by subjects will also be explored.

People with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) can be at higher risk of developing abnormal areas in their bowel. These abnormal areas can be due to active inflammation, healed inflammation, polyps or pre-cancerous changes ("dysplasia"). It is for this reason that people with IBD are offered periodic surveillance colonoscopy procedures to identify, characterize and where necessary remove abnormal areas or lesions from the bowel. These can be difficult to characterize correctly, which is important to make the correct endoscopic diagnosis and management plan. Technical advancements in endoscopy mean that more tools are available to identify and characterize these lesions in real time during colonoscopy. Specialists regularly performing gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy ("endoscopists") will often receive special training, both during their initial postgraduate training and through continuous professional development programs. This study aims to evaluate whether an online training platform can improve the ability of endoscopists to characterize dysplasia in IBD. The goal is to support improved decision-making during IBD surveillance, reporting of dysplastic lesions, and ultimately the care and outcomes of people with IBD.

Adequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy is paramount for optimal diagnostic accuracy and safety. However, the need for high volumes to clean the colon often makes it difficult for patients to adhere to. Therefore, new low volume bowel preparation fluids have been developed. Little is known on the impact of these low volume bowel preparation fluids (1L), compared to intermediate-volume (2L) laxatives on quality of life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to provide further evidence on the presumed positive effect of ultra-low volume bowel preparation on patients' QoL and cost-effectiveness, in addition to its already demonstrated positive effect on bowel cleansing for colonoscopy. This multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted in four hospitals in the Netherlands. Secure web-based questionnaires will be used before starting bowel preparation (baseline, t=0) and within 1 week (t=1) after colonoscopy, to assess the impact of bowel preparation on QoL and explore costs and productivity loss for cost-effectiveness analysis.

A prospective, single-center, single-arm, non-randomized, post-market pilot study evaluating the technical feasibility of mucosal staining during COLON2 Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) procedure in population at high risk for Colorectal Cancer (CRC), when using MB-MMX (Methylene Blue). Up to 15 subjects will be enrolled in 1 center located in Spain. Study duration- up to 10 months from study approval.

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of three standard of care outreach approaches (i.e., mailed letter, secure message, and telephone call) on patient adoption of the new 10-year colonoscopy surveillance interval recommendation for a random sample of health plan members who have a now-outdated 5-year surveillance interval due to a finding of 1-2 small adenomas at their prior colonoscopy. The primary study endpoint is the proportion of patients in each outreach arm who adopt the new 10-year colonoscopy surveillance interval.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in men and the second most common cancer in women.There are about 14 million cases of colonoscopy in the United States every year. In recent years, the incidence of colorectal cancer in China has risen sharply, becoming a serious threat to people's health.For small(≤ 9mm) lesions, endoscopic biopsy forceps and cold snare polypectomy can be used to remove.For larger lesions, especially laterally spreading tumor,endoscopic mucosal resection is a classic method of treatment.With the increasing diameter of the lesion size(> 20mm),we also need to adopt endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection. As IT, Hook knife, BB, and other devices appear constantly, foreign researchers recently adopted a variation of conventional EMR（CEMR）, namely endoscopic mucosal resection with circumferential precutting(EMR - P).The technology is superior to conventional EMR for 10 to 20 mm polyps.Moreover, preliminary studies suggest that it has good safety and efficacy, and may be a better method for treatment of 10-20mm polyps under colonoscopy. This clinical trial is being conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of two methods of polypectomy, CEMR and EMR-P, for 10-20mm colorectal polyps.

The effectiveness of colonoscopy in reducing colorectal cancer mortality relies on the detection and removal of neoplastic polyps. Because the risk of prevalent cancer and of transition to cancer increases with polyp size, effective and safe resection of large polyps is particularly important. Large polyps ≥20mm are removed by so-called endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) using electrocautery snares. Resection of these large polyps is associated with a risk of severe complications that may require hospitalization and additional interventions. The most common risk is delayed bleeding which is observed in approximately 2-9% of patients. A recent retrospective study suggests that closure of the large mucosal defect after resection may decrease the risk of delayed bleeding. However, significant uncertainty remains about the polypectomy techniques to optimizing resection and minimizing risk. Important aspects that may affect risk include clipping of the mucosal defect and electrocautery setting.

This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients who undergo single-port laparoscopic colectomy and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for colonic neoplasia (large polyp not amenable to endoscopic removal/ cancer) through a randomized controlled trial. After informed consent, patients will be randomized to have either conventional or single-port laparoscopic colectomy by a team of surgeons with good experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Patients' demographic, operative detail and post-operative outcomes including operating time, blood loss, complications, pain score, analgesic requirement, resumption of gastrointestinal function and length of hospital stay will be recorded prospectively. The patients will be blinded to the type of treatment that they have received during the first three days after operation (post-operative pain and analgesic requirement will be recorded in these period). Patients will have long term up to record for cancer recurrence and survival. The results of two groups of patients will be compared scientifically to assess if single-incision laparoscopic colectomy results in any difference in outcomes when compared to conventional laparoscopic colectomy.