Table 3.
Comparison of ADR in the current study and those reported in the literature
| Overall ADR air method | 36% | Current report |
| Overall ADR water method | 40% | |
| Overall ADR water with indigo carmine method (intent-to-treat without poor bowel prep exclusion) | 62% | |
| Representative published overall ADR | ADR | Literature Reference |
| Narrow band imaging | 23% | 27 |
| High definition colonoscopes | 24.7% | 23 |
| Withdrawal time >6 min | 28.3% | 32 |
| High definition colonoscopes | 28.8% | 22 |
| Chromoendoscopy and standard colonoscope (after excluding 4% with poor bowel preparation) | 33.6% [29.6%] | 35 |
| Chromoendoscopy and standard colonoscope (after excluding 5% with poor bowel preparation) | 35.4% [30.4%] | 36 |
| High resolution colonoscope | 42 | 13 |
| White light and high definition colonoscope | 41–57% | 15 |
| Narrow band imaging | 51% | 24 |
| Chromoendoscopy and high definition colonoscope (after excluding 9% with poor bowel preparation) | 55.5% [46.5%] | 15 |
| Narrow band imaging | 57.3% | 28 |
| White light | 58.3% | 28 |
| High definition colonoscope | 60.4% | 21 |
| Chromoendoscopy (after excluding 8% with poor bowel preparation) | 66.2% [58.2%] | 37 |
Values in [ ] indicate results based on intent-to-treat analysis without excluding the patients with suboptimal bowel preparation.