DETECTO
“Adenoma detection rate should be used as a measure of adequate inspection at screening or diagnostic colonoscopy in patients aged 50 years or more” 1
“Adenoma detection rate, derived from screening examinations,
is recommended as a measure of the quality of colonoscopic examination” 2
The gradually diminished width
of the arms profile makes them more flexibile and prevents damage to the membrane
Short Cap for improved
Polyp Detection 3
Cap helps in deflecting and flattening the mucosal folds and prevents
red-out 4
The double arm maintains Detecto in an open position during extraction and helps gently follow the anatomy of the lumen
Soft medical silicone for maximum efficiency without damage
Small profile to guarantee minimal increase in thickness
Upper lock to limit interference of the arms in the camera’s field of vision
“ADR is the most important measure of the quality of
colonoscopy performance”5
The overall miss rate for adenomas is 24%:
27% for adenomas < or = 5mm, 13% for adenomas 6-9 mm,
and 6% for adenomas > or = 1 cm 6
<5 mm
6-9 mm
≥1 cm
Detecto works in synergy with Artificial Intelligence, extending the exposed surface of the intestinal membrane and optimising the detection of micro lesions found by the camera during the endoscopy.
“The combination of CADe and Mucosa-Exposure Device during colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate and adenomas detected per colonoscopy” 10
Examples of standard colonoscopy compared
with colonoscopy performed using the Detecto distal cap.
with Detecto
without Detecto
with Detecto
Distal Cap Information
Commercial name
Detecto
Code
PRM01
Box
50pcs
Endoscope diameter
12,5 – 13,5 mm
References
1 – Kaminski Michal F. et al. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Endoscopy. 2017 Apr; 49(4):378-397
2 – Douglas A. Corley, et al. Adenoma Detection Rate and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Death. N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3; 370(14):1298-1306
3 – Siew C. Ng , PhD1, Kelvin K.F. Tsoi et al. The efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in polyp detection and cecal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. American Journal of Gastroenterology. Aug 2012; 107(8):p 1165-1173
4 – Nutalapati Venkat et al. Cap-assisted colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials. Endoscopy International Open. 2018; 06:E1214-E1223
5 – C. Hassan, A. Repici, D. K. Rex. FITting ADR to colonoscopy indication. United European Gastroenterol Journal. 2017 Mar; 5(2):149-152
6 – Douglas K. Rex et al. Colonoscopic Miss Rates of Adenomas Determined by Back-to-Back Colonoscopies. Gastroenterology. 1997; 112:24-28
7 – Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. NEJM. 2010; 362:1795-1803
8 – Castaneda D, Popov VB, et al. New technologies improve adenoma detection rate, adenoma miss rate and polyp detection rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2018
9 – Atkin WS et al. European Guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition. Colonoscopic surveillance following adenoma removal. Endoscopy. 2012; 44:SE151-SE163
10 – M. Spadaccini, C. Hassan, et al. Combination of Mucosa-Exposure Device and Computer-Aided Detection for Adenoma Detection During Colonoscopy: A Randomized Trial. Gastroenterology. 2023; 165:244-251
Via Castellana, 16i
30174 Venezia, Italia
MAPS
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
P.I. 04472360272
