METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed two pictures both with white light (WL) and LCI for 54 consecutive neoplastic polyps 2-20 mm in size. All pictures were evaluated by four endoscopists according to a published polyp visibility score from four (excellent visibility) to one (poor visibility). Additionally, we calculated CD value between each polyp and surrounding mucosa in LCI and WL using an original software.
RESULTS: The mean polyp visibility scores of LCI (3.11 ± 1.05) were significantly higher than those of WL (2.50 ± 1.09, P
Patients and methods: During laboratory experiments, the cleaner (Cleash; Fujifilm Co., Tokyo, Japan and Nagase Medicals Co., Hyogo, Japan) was applied to the endoscopic lens and an air/water device (AWD) (water 200 mL, dimethicone 1 mL, Cleash 1 mL). The endoscope was submerged in water 100 times for 5 cycles. Rates of WDA were calculated for various groups (lens and AWD with or without Cleash) and compared to a normal cleaner (SL cleaner). During clinical research, 30 colonoscopies and 30 esophagogastroduodenoscopies were analyzed. For the Cleash group, the cleaner was applied to both lens and AWD. The numbers of WDA and WDA with non-rapid removal were calculated, compared to those of the SL cleaner group.
Results: The mean WDA rate for the Cleash setting (lens: Cleash; AWD: Cleash) was 11.0 %, which was significantly lower than other settings (lens: SL cleaner; AWD: water, 31.0 %;P