Trial Review

Did you know?

The ANZCTR now automatically displays published trial results and simplifies the addition of trial documents such as unpublished protocols and statistical analysis plans.

These enhancements will offer a more comprehensive view of trials, regardless of whether their results are positive, negative, or inconclusive.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov

For full trial details, please see the original record at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00930462




Registration number
NCT00930462
Ethics application status
Date submitted
26/06/2009
Date registered
30/06/2009
Date last updated
30/06/2009

Titles & IDs
Public title
Evaluation of the Use of Cap in Improving the Performance of Colonoscopy
Scientific title
A Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Cap-Assisted Colonoscopy Versus Standard Colonoscopy
Secondary ID [1] 0 0
X07-0107
Secondary ID [2] 0 0
CAPCOLON
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Trial acronym
Linked study record

Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Colonoscopy 0 0
Condition category
Condition code

Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Devices - Cap (Olympus Medical Systems: D-201-15004, D-201-14304 and D-201-12704)

No intervention: Conventional colonoscopy - No cap fitted on the colonoscopes for this group.

Experimental: Cap-assisted colonoscopy -


Treatment: Devices: Cap (Olympus Medical Systems: D-201-15004, D-201-14304 and D-201-12704)
Plastic cap fitted on the colonoscope
Intervention code [1] 0 0
Treatment: Devices
Comparator / control treatment
Control group

Outcomes
Primary outcome [1] 0 0
Time to cecum
Timepoint [1] 0 0
One month
Secondary outcome [1] 0 0
Polyp detection rate
Timepoint [1] 0 0
One month

Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
* All colonoscopy patients referred for colonoscopy at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital.
Minimum age
18 Years
Maximum age
No limit
Sex
Both males and females
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Key exclusion criteria
* Prior colonic resection
* Pregnancy.
* Severe co-morbidities.
* Tertiary referral for endo-mucosal resection.
* Acute surgical conditions such as severe colitis, toxic megacolon, ischemic colitis, acute gastrointestinal bleeding.

Study design
Purpose of the study
Diagnosis
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people receiving the treatment/s


Intervention assignment
Parallel
Other design features
Phase
Phase 4
Type of endpoint/s
Statistical methods / analysis

Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Data analysis
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Other reasons
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
1/03/2008
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Actual
1/02/2009
Sample size
Target
Accrual to date
Final
400
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
NSW
Recruitment hospital [1] 0 0
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital - Sydney
Recruitment postcode(s) [1] 0 0
- Sydney

Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Other
Name
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia
Address
Country

Ethics approval
Ethics application status

Summary
Brief summary
The aim of this study is to compare the colonoscopy success rate, cecal time and polyp detection rate between cap-fitted colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy.
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00930462
Trial related presentations / publications
Lee YT, Lai LH, Hui AJ, Wong VW, Ching JY, Wong GL, Wu JC, Chan HL, Leung WK, Lau JY, Sung JJ, Chan FK. Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy in comparison with regular colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Jan;104(1):41-6. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.56.
Kondo S, Yamaji Y, Watabe H, Yamada A, Sugimoto T, Ohta M, Ogura K, Okamoto M, Yoshida H, Kawabe T, Omata M. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan;102(1):75-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00897.x. Epub 2006 Nov 13.
Harada Y, Hirasawa D, Fujita N, Noda Y, Kobayashi G, Ishida K, Yonechi M, Ito K, Suzuki T, Sugawara T, Horaguchi J, Takasawa O, Obana T, Oohira T, Onochi K, Kanno Y, Kuroha M, Iwai W. Impact of a transparent hood on the performance of total colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):637-44. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.029.
Shida T, Katsuura Y, Teramoto O, Kaiho M, Takano S, Yoshidome H, Miyazaki M. Transparent hood attached to the colonoscope: does it really work for all types of colonoscopes? Surg Endosc. 2008 Dec;22(12):2654-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-9790-6. Epub 2008 Feb 23.
Tee HP, Corte C, Al-Ghamdi H, Prakoso E, Darke J, Chettiar R, Rahman W, Davison S, Griffin SP, Selby WS, Kaffes AJ. Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2010 Aug 21;16(31):3905-10. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i31.3905.
Public notes

Contacts
Principal investigator
Name 0 0
Arthur J Kaffes, FRACP
Address 0 0
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney
Country 0 0
Phone 0 0
Fax 0 0
Email 0 0
Contact person for public queries
Name 0 0
Address 0 0
Country 0 0
Phone 0 0
Fax 0 0
Email 0 0
Contact person for scientific queries



Summary Results

For IPD and results data, please see https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00930462