Skip to main content
. 2012 Jul 1;2(3):106–111. doi: 10.4161/jig.23728

Table 3.

Comparison of ADR in the current study and those reported in the literature

ADR water method 44% Current report
ADR water method with indigocarmine added 62%
Representative published overall ADR ADR Literature Reference
Narrow band imaging 23% 24
High definition colonoscopies 24.7% 20
Withdrawal time >6 min 28.3% 29
High definition colonoscopies 28.8% 19
Chromoendoscopy and standard colonoscope (after excluding 4% with poor bowel preparation) 33.6% [29.6%] 32
Chromoendoscopy and standard colonoscope (after excluding 5% with poor bowel preparation) 35.4% [30.4%] 33
High resolution colonoscope 42 37
White light and high definition colonoscope 41–57% 17
Narrow band imaging 51% 21
Chromoendoscopy and high definition colonoscope (after excluding 9% with poor bowel preparation) 55.5% [46.5%] 17
Narrow band imaging 57.3% 25
White light 58.3% 25
High definition colonoscope 60.4% 18
Chromoendoscopy (after excluding 8% with poor bowel preparation) 66.2% [58.2%] 34

Values in [ ] indicate results based on intent-to-treat analysis without excluding the patients with suboptimal bowel preparation.