METHODS: A comprehensive search of was conducted for all relevant in-vitro studies. All randomized controlled in-vitro studies that evaluated the effect of calcium hydroxide on the push-out bond strength of resin-based or calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers were assessed. The variables of interest were extracted, and the risk of the included studies was evaluated. The standardized mean difference was calculated and the significance level was set at p value <0.05.

RESULTS: A total of 26 studies were eligible for analysis. There were 45 independent comparison groups and 1009 recruited teeth. The pooled data showed no significant difference in push-out bond strength between calcium hydroxide and control group in the resin-based group (SMD = 0.03; 95% CI = -0.55, 0.60; p = 0.93), and calcium silicate-based group (SMD = 0.02; 95% CI = -0.31, 0.35; p = 0.90). Most of the studies (21 out of 26) were at medium risk of bias and five studies showed a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that calcium hydroxide used as intracanal medication does not influence the push-out bond strength of the resin- and calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers.

METHODS: We enrolled patients undergoing colonoscopy from February 2015 to May 2017 in two institutions. All procedures were performed with the latest system (EVIS LUCERA ELITE, Olympus). The cecum and ascending colon were first observed with white light imaging (WLI) in both the NBI and WLI group. Then, the colonoscope was re-inserted, and the cecum and ascending colon were observed for an additional 30 s. In this second observation, NBI was performed for the first 130 patients in the NBI group and WLI for the next 130 in the WLI group. The number of adenoma and sessile serrated polyps (ASPs) in the second observation were examined in both groups. According to our initial pilot study, the sample size was estimated at 126.

RESULTS: In the first observation, the number of ASPs was 72 in the NBI group and 72 in the WLI group (p = 1.0). In the second observation, the number of ASPs was 23 in the NBI group and 10 in the WLI group (p = 0.02). The polyp and adenoma detection rates in the second observation were 16.2% and 12.3% in the NBI group and 7.7% (p = 0.03) and 6.2% (p = 0.09) in the WLI group.

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.

Patients and methods : We retrospectively reviewed 1000 consecutive colorectal ESD cases (April 2006 to January 2017). Since 2016, the PCM was performed in 58 cases. The indications for ESD included (1) tumors ≥ 20 mm in size diagnosed as intramucosal cancer or high-grade dysplasia and part of T1a cancer using magnifying endoscopic examinations and (2) tumors that appeared impossible to resect with endoscopic mucosal resection because of suspected fibrosis. We identified 120 cases with severe fibrosis and compared them to cases without severe fibrosis. Additionally, the 120 severe fibrosis cases were divided into the PCM and non-PCM groups. En bloc resection, procedure time, discontinuation, and complications were analyzed between these 2 groups.

Results:  Among all 1000 ESDs, severe fibrosis and discontinuation rates were 12.0 % (120 cases) and 1.8 % (18 cases), respectively. Regarding the comparison between cases with severe fibrosis and with no severe fibrosis, there were significant differences about en bloc resection rate (78.3 % vs. 95.7 %, P   0.6.

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.