Search

Introduction: In light-emitting diode (LED) and LASER colonoscopy, linked color imaging (LCI) and blue light/laser imaging (BLI) are used for lesion detection and characterization worldwide. We analyzed the difference of LCI and BLI images of colorectal lesions between LED and LASER in a multinational study. Methods: We prospectively observed lesions with white light imaging (WLI), LCI, and BLI using both LED and LASER colonoscopies from January 2020 to August 2021. Images were graded by 27 endoscopists from nine countries using the polyp visibility score: 4 (excellent), 3 (good), 2 (fair), and 1 (poor) and the comparison score (LED better/similar/LASER better) for WLI/LCI/BLI images of each lesion. Results: Finally, 32 lesions (polyp size: 20.0 ± 15.2 mm) including 9 serrated lesions, 13 adenomas, and 10 T1 cancers were evaluated. The polyp visibility scores of LCI/WLI for international and Japan-expert endoscopists were 3.17 ± 0.73/3.17 ± 0.79 (p = 0.92) and 3.34 ± 0.78/2.84 ± 1.22 (p < 0.01) for LED and 3.30 ± 0.71/3.12 ± 0.77 (p < 0.01) and 3.31 ± 0.82/2.78 ± 1.23 (p < 0.01) for LASER. Regarding the comparison of lesion visibility about between LED and LASER colonoscopy in international endoscopists, a significant difference was achieved not for WLI, but for LCI. The rates of LED better/similar/LASER better for brightness under WLI were 54.5%/31.6%/13.9% (International) and 75.0%/21.9%/3.1% (Japan expert). Those under LCI were 39.2%/35.4%/25.3% (International) and 31.3%/53.1%/15.6% (Japan expert). There were no significant differences in the diagnostic accuracy and the comparison score of BLI images between LED and LASER. Conclusions: The differences of lesion visibility for WLI/LCI/BLI between LED and LASER in international endoscopists could be compared to those in Japanese endoscopists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A compact and cost-effective light source-processor combined 3-color light-emitting diode (LED) endoscopic system (ELUXEO-Lite: EP-6000, Fujifilm Co., Tokyo) with a magnified colonoscope (EC-6600ZP, Fujifilm Co.) has been released. Aims: In this study, we analyzed the efficacy of this system for colorectal tumor characterization with magnified blue light imaging (BLI-LED) and image's subjective and objective evaluations, compared to a magnified blue laser imaging (BLI-LASER) using a standard LASER endoscopic system. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 37 lesions observed with both BLI-LED and BLI-LASER systems from 2019 using the Japanese narrow band imaging classification. Two representative magnified images, one BLI-LED and one BLI-LASER, of the same area of a lesion were evaluated for diagnostic accuracy and visualization quality by three experts and three non-experts. Their color difference values (CDVs) and brightness values (BVs) were also calculated as objective indicators. Results: Among 37 lesions, mean tumor size was 18.9 ± 13.1 mm, and 21 lesions were nonpolypoid. Histopathology revealed 14 sessile serrated lesions, 7 adenomas, 12 high-grade dysplasias and T1a cancers, and 4 T1b cancers. The diagnostic accuracy rates of BLI-LED/BLI-LASER of experts and non-experts were 90.1% and 87.4% (p = 0.52) and 89.2% and 89.2% (p = 0.99). The percentages of instances where BLI-LED images were better, the two imaging types were equivalent, or BLI-LASER images were better were 16%/83%/1% for experts and 19%/58%/23% for non-experts (p < 0.001). CDVs and BVs between BLI-LED and BLI-LASER were not significantly different (CDVs: p = 0.653 , BVs: p = 0.518). Conclusions: BLI-LED using the compact system was noninferior to BLI-LASER for colorectal tumor characterization and image quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]