CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04291976HELIOSUpdated Nov 21, 2023

Back-to-back Endoscopy Versus Single-pass Endoscopy and Chromoendoscopy in IBD Surveillance

An interventional study of Back-to-back high-definition white light endoscopy and single-pass high-definition white light endoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases and Colorectal Neoplasms, sponsored by Radboud University Medical Center. Completed at 4 sites in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-11-21.

Sponsored by Radboud University Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
563
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The current international guidelines for CRC surveillance in IBD recommend as first choice the use of chromoendoscopy, and as an alternative high-definition white light endoscopy (HDWLE) for optimal dysplasia detection, based on data from clinical trials. However, data on the superiority of CE over HDWLE are not consistent in literature. The investigators hypothesize that the better performance of CE in some clinical trials is the result of the associated longer procedural time and the fact that every colon segment is examined twice. Currently, no studies have been published evaluating the dysplastic yield of back-to back HDWLE compared to HDWLE with a single pass or CE in patients with IBD. In the present study, the investigators aim to compare the yield of dysplasia/CRC between 1) regular HDWLE, 2) HDWLE back-to-back, and 3) CE.

Read the detailed description

The investigators assume based on previous research a yield of 12% using high-definition white light endoscopy and 24% using either chromoendoscopy or high-definition white light endoscopy with a second examination (Imperatore et al 2019). To show non-inferiority of back-to-back HDWLE compared to CE, with a non-inferiority margin of 10% (power 80% and alpha 5%,) a total of 226 patients per group is required.

To demonstrate a superiority of back-to-back HDWLE compared to a regular HDWLE, with a 1:2 allocation ratio of single-pass vs back-to-back , 113 and 226 patients per group are needed to achieve 80% power with an alpha of 5%. Therefore, the investigators will include 226 patients in group back-to-back HDWLE, 226 in group CE, and 113 patients in group regular HDWLE. This amounts to a total of 560 patients. To account for any screen-failures The investigators will include at most 5% (of 560) additional patients until 80% power is reached.

02

Conditions studied

  • Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
  • Colorectal Neoplasms

Keywords

  • IBD
  • Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
  • Colorectal Cancer
  • Surveillance
  • Dysplasia
  • Back-to-Back
  • Chromoendoscopy
  • White light
03

In context

Colorectal Neoplasms

5,600 studies on the registry are indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms; 1,459 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 563 is above the median of 77 across 4,123 interventional studies indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms.

Browse Colorectal Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Radboud University Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 959 studies on the registry; 134 are open to participants now.

Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Signed informed consent
  • Patients with inflammatory bowel disease, an estimated involvement of at least 30% of the colonic surface and a disease duration of at least 8 years (or any disease duration in case of concomitant primary sclerosing cholangitis).
  • Previous assessable surveillance endoscopy > 1 year
  • Age > 18 years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Active colitis > 20 cm and/or inflammation resulting in an insufficient surveillance procedure according to the endoscopist.
  • Allergy or intolerance to methylene blue
  • Insufficient bowel cleansing (BBPS \<6)
  • Refusing or incapable to agree with informed consent
  • Pregnant women
  • > 50 % of the colon surgically removed
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
563 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    back-to-back HDWLE

    Similar to single-pass HDWLE, with a second segmental inspection after the first examination in the same session. Equipment is similar to 1.

    Procedure: Back-to-back high-definition white light endoscopy

  • Active comparator
    single-pass HDWLE

    Using HD white light, the entire colon is examined for dysplasia and other abnormalities after the caecum is reached. The colonoscope has a high-definition camera and processor. All images are displayed on a high definition monitor for optimal resolution.

    Procedure: single-pass high-definition white light endoscopy

  • Active comparator
    Chromoendoscopy

    After introduction of the endoscope into the colon a dye (methylene blue or 0.3% indigo carmine) will be sprayed through a catheter positioned into the biopsy channel. Per segment, the entire colon is dyed, inspected, and lesions are removed. Equipment is similar to the other two arms.

    Procedure: chromoendoscopy

Interventions

  • ProcedureBack-to-back high-definition white light endoscopy

    Using HD white light, the entire colon is examined for dysplasia and other abnormalities after the caecum is reached, with a second segmental inspection after the first examination in the same session.The colonoscope has a high-definition camera and processor. All images are displayed on a high definition monitor for optimal resolution.

  • Proceduresingle-pass high-definition white light endoscopy

    Using HD white light, the entire colon is examined for dysplasia and other abnormalities after the caecum is reached. The colonoscope has a high-definition camera and processor. All images are displayed on a high definition monitor for optimal resolution.

  • Procedurechromoendoscopy

    After introduction of the endoscope into the colon a dye (methylene blue or indigo carmine) will be sprayed through a catheter positioned into the biopsy channel. Per segment, the entire colon is dyed, inspected, and lesions are removed. Equipment is similar to the other two interventions.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. detection rate of neoplasia for each technique

    Time frame: During endoscopy

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of all lesions for each technique

    Time frame: During endoscopy

  2. Number of dysplastic lesions for each technique

    Time frame: After each endoscopy, within one month after the procedure.

  3. Kudo classification for each lesion

    Time frame: During endoscopy when a lesion is detected

  4. Duration

    Total endoscopic procedure time and endoscopic procedure time during withdrawal for each technique.

    Time frame: During endoscopy

  5. Number of targeted biopsies taken in the different groups.

    Time frame: During endoscopy

  6. Percentage of non-interpretable/assessable endoscopies

    e.g. insufficient preparation, inflammation

    Time frame: During endoscopy

  7. Location of the lesion

    Time frame: During endoscopy

  8. Size of the lesion in mm

    Time frame: During endoscopy

07

Study locations

4 sites
  • Radboudumc
    Nijmegen, Gelderland 6525GA, Netherlands
  • Utrecht University Medical Center
    Utrecht, Gelderland 3584CX, Netherlands
  • Amsterdam UMC, location AMC
    Amsterdam, Noord-Holland 1105 AZ, Netherlands
  • Leiden University Medical Center
    Leiden, Zuid Holland, Netherlands
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 21, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04291976
Lead sponsor
Radboud University Medical Center
Collaborators
UMC Utrecht, Leiden University Medical Center, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 2, 2020
Start date
Mar 13, 2020
Primary completion
May 23, 2023
Completion
Nov 7, 2023
Last update
Nov 21, 2023

Study contacts

Frank Hoentjen, MD PhD
principal investigator · Radboud University Medical Center
Bas Oldenburg, MD PhD
principal investigator · UMC Utrecht

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion