Gastroenterology
Volume 134, Issue 1 , Pages 327-340, January 2008

American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Technology Assessment on Image-Enhanced Endoscopy

  • Tonya Kaltenbach

      Affiliations

    • Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress requests for reprints to: Chair, Clinical Practice and Economics Committee, AGA Institute National Office, c/o Membership Department, 4930 Del Ray Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland 20814. Fax: (301) 654-5920.
    • ,
  • Yasushi Sano

      Affiliations

    • National Cancer Center East, Kashiwa, Japan
    • ,
  • Shai Friedland

      Affiliations

    • Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California
    • ,
  • Roy Soetikno

      Affiliations

    • Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California

published online 01 November 2007.

Article Outline

This document presents the official recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Technology Assessment on “Image-Enhanced Endoscopy.” It was approved by the Clinical Practice and Economics Committee on August 3, 2007, and by the AGA Institute Governing Board September 27, 2007.

Abbreviations used in this paper: EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection, IEE, image-enhanced endoscopy, NBI, narrow band imaging

 

The Technology Assessment on Image-Enhanced Endoscopy developed under the aegis of the AGA Institute and its Clinical Practice and Economics Committee (CPEC) was approved by the AGA Institute Governing Board. The data used to formulate these recommendations are derived from the data available at the time of their creation and may be supplemented and updated as new information is assimilated. These recommendations are intended for adult patients, with the intent of suggesting preferred approaches to specific medical issues or problems. They are based upon the interpretation and assimilation of scientifically valid research, derived from a comprehensive review of published literature. Ideally, the intent is to provide evidence based upon prospective, randomized placebo-controlled trials; however, when this is not possible the use of experts’ consensus may occur. The recommendations are intended to apply to healthcare providers of all specialties. It is important to stress that these recommendations should not be construed as a standard of care. The AGA Institute stresses that the final decision regarding the care of the patient should be made by the physician with a focus on all aspects of the patient’s current medical situation.

Back to Article Outline

Executive Summary 

Introduction 

Gastrointestinal cancers represent the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The diagnosis of precursor and early gastrointestinal cancers is therefore of great interest because their endoscopic and surgical treatment present the best chance for cure. These precancers and early cancers are often subtle and can pose a challenge to gastroenterologists to visualize using standard white light endoscopy. Contrast enhancement of the endoscopy images, through use of dye solutions, has been developed and used in select indications. Newer endoscopes are now equipped with optical and/or electronic technologies to also increase the contrast of structures or cells imaged during endoscopy.

The term “image-enhanced endoscopy” (IEE) encompasses various means of enhancing contrast during endoscopy using dye, optical, and/or electronic methods. IEE allows improved visualization of lesions and can be used to gain insight into the pathology of the lesion, which, in turn, provides guidance to select the optimal treatment.

Recommendations 

Available data support the use of IEE in the detection and treatment of early squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus, early gastric cancer, and superficial colorectal lesions. The use of Lugol’s solution may improve the endoscopic visualization of high-grade dysplasia and early squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus and thus may be considered in high-risk patient populations. The use of diluted indigo carmine solution aids the diagnosis and treatment of early gastric cancer. The solution pools at the border of the lesion and thus enhances visualization of these lesions, which are most often nonpolypoid. By pooling into the depression or ulceration of the lesion, the solution aids in the classification of the morphology, which in turn is important in the medical decision making of treatment strategy. Similarly, diluted indigo carmine solution is useful in the evaluation of areas suspected of containing nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms in defining the border and morphology of lesions. By filling the pits of the glands and imaging using high-resolution or high-magnification colonoscopes, endoscopic diagnosis of neoplastic and nonneoplastic lesions and estimation of depth of invasion can be performed to aid in the decision of treatment strategy. IEE is not routinely used in the management of diseases of the small intestine. Equipment-based IEE is increasingly reported to aid in the detailed visualization of the microvessels and surface structures of neoplastic, metaplastic, and hyperplastic tissues.

Back to Article Outline

Technology Assessment 

The following guidelines were developed to assist physicians in the appropriate use of various modalities of contrast enhancement of endoscopic images, termed “image-enhanced endoscopy” (IEE). They emanate from a comprehensive review of the medical literature pertaining to IEE, which previously required the use of dyes and was called chromoendoscopy but more recently can also be accomplished using optical and/or electronic technology. The new IEE technology will allow us to visualize the gastrointestinal mucosa in detail. Drawing an analogy to the use of radiology image enhancement methods, such as contrast, the use of IEE will play a similarly important role. Thus, we herein provide a timely and necessary review on the current state of IEE in order to summarize its clinical application today and outline its future potentials.

Introduction 

Dye or stain solutions have been applied throughout the gastrointestinal mucosa to enhance endoscopic visualization. With increased contrast, the image displays the mucosal topography and borders of lesions in finer detail and, in turn, aids in the endoscopic interpretation of gastrointestinal disease. The use of dye has supplemented the endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of precancers and early cancers, specifically those that are nonpolypoid. These lesions, which can appear as superficially elevated, flat, or depressed, have been globally described as a challenge to diagnose using white light endoscopy due to their subtle morphology.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 The diagnosis of precancers and early gastrointestinal cancers is of great interest because their endoscopic or surgical resection is highly curative.

Recent progress in optics and computerized processing of endoscopic images provide an optical and/or electronic enhancement of the mucosal structures.11, 12, 13, 14 The equipment-based IEE adds to the prior established techniques of applying dye or stain (also called chromoscopy or chromoendoscopy).15, 16, 17 The term “image-enhanced endoscopy” (IEE) recognizes both dye-based (chromoendoscopy) as well as equipment-based endoscopy (Table 1) to further advance endoscopic imaging.

Table 1. Image Enhanced Endoscopy
TypeMode (solution/instrument)Mechanism of contrastProposed purpose
Dye-based IEE (chromoscopy)
Absorptive dye
Lugol’s solution0.5%–3% solutionNormal intestinal epithelium binds iodineDiagnosis of esophageal squamous dysplasia or early cancer
For 2% dilution, mix 8 mL 5% solutiona with 12 mL sterile water
Methylene blue
0.5% solution

For 0.5% dilution, mix 10 mL 1% solutionb with 10 mL sterile water

Small and large intestinal epithelium actively absorb stainDiagnosis of intestinal metaplasiac
Contrast dye
Indigo carmine
0.1%–0.4% solution

For 0.2% dilution, mix 5 mL 0.8% solutionb with 15 mL sterile water.

Dye pools in mucosal crevices; no cellular stainingDiagnosis of early gastric and colorectal cancer
Equipment-based IEE
Optical
NBIOlympusModification of light source with narrowed wavelengths to enhance capillary patternDiagnosis of early oropharyngeal and gastrointestinal cancerd
Electronic
Spectral estimation technologyFujinonProcessing of image to enhance capillary patternDiagnosis of early oropharyngeal and gastrointestinal cancerd
Surface enhancementPentaxProcessing of image to enhance color pattern or structureDiagnosis of early oropharyngeal and gastrointestinal cancerd

aHumcon Co, Texarkana, TX.

bAmerican Regent Laboratories, Inc, Shirley, NY.

cMethylene blue has also been proposed to improve endoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus, although there is currently insufficient evidence to support its routine use in this setting.92

dThere are currently limited data on equipment-based IEE, most of which is on NBI.

The aim of this technical review is to summarize the literature on IEE and to provide a guide for its current application in endoscopy.

Literature Review and Analysis 

The techniques and technologies and the potential outcomes of IEE will be described. This review is based on a MEDLINE search performed through June 2007 using the following Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms: chromoscopy, chromoendoscopy, dye stain endoscopy, contrast stain endoscopy, narrow band imaging (NBI), multi-band imaging, and autofluorescence imaging. A manual search of article reference lists for additional citations was also performed. Pertinent studies published in English were reviewed. Studies published in abstract form only were excluded.

Techniques 

Dye-based IEE 

The stains used for the traditional dye-based IEE can be categorized into absorptive or vital, reactive, and contrast stains. The stains that are commonly used in the referral centers around the world and described in the literature will be the focus.16, 17, 18, 19

Absorptive stains 

Specific epithelial cells take up absorptive stains. Three types of absorptive stains have been frequently described in the literature: Lugol’s solution, methylene blue, and crystal violet. Special spray or ball-tipped catheters can be used to apply the stains evenly throughout the mucosa or intensely over a specific area of interest, respectively.

The use of Lugol’s solution has been shown to improve the endoscopic detection20 and delineate21 high-grade dysplasia and early squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus in high-risk patient populations.22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29

Lugol’s solution is composed of a mixture of potassium iodide and iodine in water. The diluted solution (0.5%–3.0%) is sprayed on the mucosa via a spray catheter and is absorbed by glycogen-containing cells to produce a dark greenish-brown stain. Normal mucosa will stain intensively for about 5–8 minutes, whereas dysplastic and neoplastic areas will not stain. Its use has been occasionally associated with retrosternal pain, discomfort, nausea,30 and rarely chemical esophagitis.31 It should be used cautiously in patients with reported iodine sensitivity.19, 32 Sodium thiosulfate solution has been administered after application of Lugol’s solution to reverse staining and to decrease the side effects.30

Methylene blue (0.5%–1.0%) is taken up by actively absorbing intestinal epithelial cells. It does not stain nonabsorptive gastric or squamous epithelia and has thus predominantly been applied to enhance the detection of metaplastic epithelium with absorptive properties such as the specialized columnar epithelium of Barrett’s esophagus.33 A significant level of interobserver variability on the use of methylene blue staining in the detection of Barrett’s esophagus has notably been reported.34 Recently, methylene blue has been evaluated in the diagnosis of nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasia in patients with chronic ulcerative colitis.35

Optimal methylene blue staining of Barrett’s esophagus requires the removal of surface mucus with a mucolytic agent, such as 10% acetylcysteine solution, before its catheter application. The technique involves the use of approximately 10 mL of acetylcysteine and 20 mL of methylene blue dye for every 5 cm of circumferential columnar lined epithelium.36, 37 The stain uptake occurs within 2–3 minutes and is subsequently resistant to washing. The stain persists for up to 24 hours until complete renal excretion or cellular loss. This may result in a green hue to the urine and stool. There have been no significant side effects associated with methylene blue use, although there has been speculation on the potential of methylene blue inducing oxidative damage of DNA when photosensitized by white light.38

Crystal violet has been used primarily in pit-pattern analysis of colorectal neoplasm. Its use has been proposed to aid in the endoscopic differentiation of slightly invasive from deeply submucosal invasive carcinoma.

Crystal violet (0.1%–0.5%) is a vital stain preferentially taken up by the colonic crypts.17 Following removal of surface mucus with vigorous washing (with or without a diluted proteinase solution), adequate staining with crystal violet is achieved with the application of a few drops using a nontraumatic catheter. The stain is absorbed by the mucosa around the pit openings to provide a vivid coloration of the pit margins.

Diluted acetic acid (1%–3%) has recently been included as part of chromoscopy, although acetic acid is not a dye per se.39, 40, 41 It enhances the contrast through a number of mechanisms. Acetic acid is a mucolytic by breaking the disulfide bonds of the glycoproteins of the mucous layer. When sprayed onto columnar epithelium, acetic acid penetrates into the cells, stroma, and vascular network. Within the cells, acetic acid alters the tertiary structure of the cellular proteins. In particular, acetic acid causes a slight decrease in the intracellular pH, which in turn leads to increased polymerization of the cytokeratins, the most abundant cellular proteins, and a reversible alteration of the nucleoproteins. These changes in cellular proteins lead to increased opacity of the columnar epithelium. As acetic acid reaches the basal membrane, it breaks the barrier function of the cell membrane, leading to electrolyte leakage and capillary congestion of the stoma. These multiple effects of acetic acid enhance the contrast of the mucosa, which in turn has been reported to allow detailed classifications of Barrett’s esophagus.40

Contrast stains 

Indigo carmine is the most commonly used dye-based IEE. It is not absorbed, but it accentuates the border and surface topography of a lesion by pooling into the crevices of the mucosal surface to outline subtle changes in elevation or depression. It has been shown to be most useful in the endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of nonpolypoid columnar neoplasm. In Japan, where gastric cancer is common, diluted indigo carmine solution is often sprayed through the entire stomach for reexamination after a standard white light examination.42 In the colon, selected spraying of diluted indigo carmine stain onto the mucosa is used to highlight areas suspected to contain a nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm.43 Direct application of indigo carmine onto colorectal neoplasms in combination with high magnification has been described by referral centers to study meticulous glandular structures of the mucosa.44, 45, 46

Indigo carmine chromoscopy is accomplished using standard endoscopes. Diluted solution (0.1%–0.4%) is sprayed onto the area using a syringe via the accessory channel of the endoscope (Figure 1).

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 1. 

    Preparation technique for indigo carmine IEE. (A) For 0.2% diluted solution, mix 5 mL 0.8% solution with 15 mL sterile water. (B) Diluted solution is sprayed onto the area of interest using a syringe via the accessory channel of the endoscope.

Equipment-based IEE 

Novel endoscopic imaging technologies have been developed recently that use manipulations of the light source (optical IEE) or captured light (electronic IEE) to enhance visualization of the surface. NBI (Olympus Corp, Allentown, PA), spectral estimation technologies (Fujinon Inc, Wayne, NJ), surface enhancement (Pentax Medical Co, Orangeburg, NY), and autofluorescence imaging (Olympus Corp) have been described.

NBI 

The NBI technology uses a narrow light source to enhance visualization of the surface microvessels. Two NBI systems are available. In the NBI of the RGB sequential illumination system, narrow spectra of the red, green, and blue light that are centered on 415 nm, 445 nm, and 500 nm are used. In the NBI of the color chip system, a single filter with a 2-band pass characteristic is used to generate the NBI images. The filter has narrow bandwidths of 30 nm and central wavelengths at 415 nm (blue) and 540 nm (green). On the endoscopy monitor, the signals obtained from the 2 specialized filters are combined to form a false-color image. These shorter wavelengths of light permit focused visualization of microvessels of the superficial layer of the mucosa and submucosa (Figure 2).

Hemoglobin light absorption is optimized at these wavelengths. Thus, NBI has the potential to provide detailed characterization of lesions and aid the endoscopist in the differentiation of abnormal mucosa from normal, because the pattern and size of the microvessels in the mucosa and submucosa change when tissue becomes metaplastic, dysplastic, and neoplastic. At standard magnification (30×), the higher density of vessels seen in dysplastic and neoplastic squamous or columnar lesions appears brown in color. At high magnification (up to 100×), visualization of the microvessels using NBI permits detailed studies of the intraepithelial papillary capillary loops of the squamous mucosa and the microvessel network surrounding the glands of the columnar mucosa. The configuration, density, and size of these intraepithelial papillary capillary loops change in dysplasia and neoplasia of the squamous cell esophagus. Similarly, the microvessels network of the columnar epithelium changes in metaplasia, dysplasia, and neoplasia of the columnar cells of esophagus, stomach, and colon.11, 12

Spectral estimation technology 

The spectral estimation technology uses computerized processing to convert standard RGB signals from the endoscope’s charge-coupled device, in which there is often suboptimal contrast or differentiation between normal and diseased mucosa into color combinations that accentuate these differences. The technology uses a 3 × 3 matrix to perform a linear mathematical transformation of the red, green, and blue lights into the system output.47 In practice, the system allows the user to select a combination of 3 wavelengths and the processor will then use the corresponding matrix to process the RGB signal. Certain choices of wavelengths have been shown to accentuate differences between esophageal and gastric mucosa at the gastroesophageal junction48 as well as between normal and adenomatous colonic mucosa. The application of the spectral estimation technology in clinical practice is under recent study.49

Surface enhancement technology 

The surface enhancement technology also uses computerized processing to enhance the contrast of the structures of tissues seen during endoscopy. There is no clinical study available at present.

Autofluorescence imaging 

Autofluorescence imaging utilizes changes in concentrations of endogenous fluorophores, such as collagen, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, and flavin adenine dinuclotide.50 The video endoscopy adaptation of the autofluorescence imaging adds green and red reflectance to improve the quality of the image. Although a number of clinical studies have recently been published in the diagnosis of early esophageal cancer51 and in the detection of dysplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus,52, 53, 54, 55 there are insufficient data to support its routine clinical use.

High-Magnification and/or High-Resolution Endoscopes 

Endoscopes that are equipped with optical- and/or electronic-based IEE have high resolution or high definition with or without high-magnification capabilities. High-resolution or high-definition endoscopy provides a more detailed image of gastrointestinal mucosa, and high-magnification endoscopy enlarges the image up to 100× as compared with 30× in standard endoscopy utilizing a 20-inch monitor. At higher magnification with IEE, the visualized surface patterns of the gastrointestinal mucosa have been suggested to correlate well with the underlying histology. Proposed uses for high magnification used in conjunction with IEE include distinguishing neoplastic and nonneoplastic lesions,44, 45, 46, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 assessing depth of invasion in early colorectal carcinoma,62, 63, 64 and detecting minute tumor residue after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).65, 66, 67, 68, 69 In addition, recent studies have explored the role of high magnification with IEE in assessing disease activity70, 71 and detecting nonpolypoid neoplasia in ulcerative colitis.17, 35, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76

Ultrahigh magnification endoscopes, more than 1000×, have recently been developed and proposed as vehicles for in vivo histologic diagnosis. Endomicroscopy uses laser scanning confocal technology, and endocytoscopy applies contact light microscopic technology.77 Preliminary studies using ultramagnification technology with IEE have shown potential of this technique, although its clinical application throughout the gastrointestinal tract merits further study.78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87 These technologies, however, are designed primarily to increase magnification, rather than contrast, and thus will not be included in this review.

Outcomes 

IEE of the oropharynx and hypopharynx 

Limited data are available on the use of IEE to diagnose precancers and early cancers of the oropharynx and hypopharynx. Endoscopic findings of precancers and early cancers of the oropharynx and hypopharynx are similar to squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. On white light endoscopy, precancers and early cancers of the oropharynx and hypopharynx are typically slightly more reddish than the surrounding mucosa. These lesions are difficult to diagnose and have not been frequently described until recently. Muto et al used optical IEE and described 50 superficial lesions in patients undergoing routine screening and surveillance endoscopies of early oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Forty-one of the identified lesions were endoscopically removed and found to be either squamous cell carcinoma in situ or slightly invasive cancer.1, 2 These lesions have been shown to have distinct microvascular patterns, appreciable as brownish areas using NBI. Individual capillaries can be visualized using magnification endoscopy, and their patterns have been correlated with the lesion depth (Figure 3).

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 3. 

    IEE of a submucosally invasive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. (A) A slightly reddish area was appreciated during standard endoscopy. The border of the lesion was difficult to distinguish from the surrounding normal mucosa. (B) NBI was used through a switch at the control body of the endoscope. The lesion appeared brownish as compared with the surrounding normal mucosa. A magnified white light (C) and NBI (D) image demonstrated several red and brown dots, respectively, which represent dilated and irregular-shaped and density of intraepithelial papillary capillary loops. The resected specimen revealed well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma invading the superficial part of the submucosa. Courtesy of Dr M. Muto, National Cancer Center East, Japan.

IEE of the esophagus 

IEE has been applied toward identification of esophageal neoplasia in both squamous and Barrett’s epithelium. It is indicated in the diagnosis and treatment of pre- and early squamous cell cancer of the esophagus (Figure 4).

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 4. 

    Dye-based and optical-based IEE of a submucosally invasive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. (A) A large patch of reddish area was observed during standard endoscopy. (B) Lugol’s solution was sprayed using a specialized catheter throughout the entire thoracic esophagus. After spraying, normal mucosa became brownish/greenish, while the lesion did not change in color. (C) After the effect of Lugol’s solution has disappeared, NBI was used to view the abnormal mucosa. Irregular-shaped and density of intraepithelial papillary capillary loops was observed. Courtesy of Dr. M. Muto, National Cancer Center East, Japan.

Squamous cell cancer 

The use of Lugol’s solution has been shown to improve the endoscopic detection of20 and, moreover, delineate high-grade dysplasia and squamous cell cancer of the esophagus in patients at increased risk, such as patients with head and neck cancer,21, 23, 24 heavy smokers,25 patients with lye ingestions,26 and alcoholic patients.25, 27, 28 A recent study of 326 patients with head and neck cancers from Brazil demonstrated a significantly higher yield in the detection of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia using Lugol’s IEE in patients at high risk for squamous cell cancer of the esophagus.29 The use of Lugol’s solution is a crucial component in EMR of early squamous cell esophageal lesions in order to define the lesion borders and assess for the completeness of resection.88 The use of NBI with magnification was shown to increase the accuracy of surface pattern analysis in a study of 41 patients with esophageal squamous neoplasia.89 The color contrast ratio between vessels and mucosa was significantly greater in the NBI images.

Barrett’s esophagus 

Methylene blue IEE has predominantly been proposed to improve endoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus,33, 36, 37, 90, 91 although there is currently insufficient evidence to support its routine use in this setting.92 Methylene blue selectively stains specialized intestinal metaplasia. Barrett’s esophagus becomes blue, while areas of squamous mucosa and gastric-type columnar metaplasia remain pale. Using this technique, Canto et al showed that the average number of biopsy specimens obtained per patient was significantly lower and the proportion of specialized columnar epithelium in each specimen was significantly higher compared with random biopsy.36, 93 Dysplasia or cancer was also diagnosed in significantly more patients (44% vs 28%; P = .03) than by random biopsy technique.36, 94 Dysplastic areas in Barrett’s esophagus showed decreased or heterogeneous staining. Subsequent studies have not produced similar results.95, 96 Several studies of IEE in Barrett’s esophagus surveillance have evaluated the use of high-resolution97 or magnification endoscopy combined with either double-dye staining with methylene blue and crystal violet98, 99 or single-dye staining with methylene blue,100, 101 indigo carmine,32, 102 or acetic acid103, 104, 105 IEE. Use of methylene blue to stain Barrett’s neoplasms, however, has been reported to be operator dependent.34 Preliminary studies have suggested that magnifying endoscopy with NBI enhances visualization of surface glandular structures in Barrett’s esophagus.97, 106, 107, 108, 109

IEE of the stomach 

IEE using diluted indigo carmine is routine in the diagnosis and treatment of early gastric cancer. In Japan, it is used in the evaluation of suspicious areas for early gastric cancer to determine the border and surface topography. It is often sprayed throughout the stomach following a complete screening examination to exclude the small or nonpolypoid early gastric cancer. Because the benefits for visualization of the nonpolypoid early gastric cancer are evident, comparative studies have not been performed. Other methods of IEE are not used routinely. Methylene blue chromoendoscopy using magnification endoscopes has been formally studied as a method for diagnosing gastric intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia.110, 111 Endoscopic correlation with gastric lesion histology has also been described using magnifying endoscopy combined with acetic acid or with NBI. In a case series, the aceto-whitening disappeared earlier in gastric adenocarcinoma than in the noncarcinomatous mucosa with clear border delineation of the lesion.41 Using NBI with high magnification, observation of a light blue crest on the epithelial surface in the gastric mucosa correlated with histologic evidence of intestinal metaplasia.51 Using NBI, the vascular pattern of early gastric cancer has been proposed to correlate with invasive histology.14, 112

IEE of the small intestine 

IEE is not routinely used in the management of diseases of the small intestine, although various duodenal abnormalities, including gastric metaplasia, hyperplastic Brunner’s glands, inflammatory changes, villous atrophy, and adenoma, have been evaluated with IEE and high-magnification endoscopy.113 Subtle mucosal changes or villous atrophy seen on standard endoscopy, as in celiac sprue, are more visible with magnification endoscopy, particularly with indigo carmine114, 115 or methylene blue116 IEE.

IEE of the colon 

IEE is most useful in the evaluation of areas suspected of containing nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms and in classifying and defining the borders of the lesions. Exploratory studies on the use of IEE in the detection of colorectal polyps, assessment of neoplastic lesion margins before resection, and differentiation of nonneoplastic and neoplastic polyps have been performed. There are currently limited data on optical-based or electronic-based IEE.13, 117, 118, 119, 120

Detection of colorectal polyps 

IEE has been described to enhance the detection of colorectal neoplasm, particularly nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm (Figure 5).10, 43, 59, 75, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128 IEE has been shown to increase the detection of colorectal polyps. In most units, indigo carmine dye is selectively sprayed to evaluate areas suspicious for neoplasia because application of IEE to the entire colon has been associated with a high detection rate of hyperplastic lesions.59, 129, 130 Furthermore, lesions in the dependent field of view may be obscured by the pooled solution. The limitations of dye-based IEE throughout the colon may be circumvented in the future by the use of optical-based or electronic-based IEE.118, 119, 128

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 5. 

    IEE of a depressed colorectal neoplasm. (A) A slightly reddish mucosal area was visualized during standard colonoscopy. (B) Diluted indigo carmine (0.2%) was used to further characterize the lesion and delineate its borders. (C) EMR inject-and-cut technique was used. (D) Following EMR, no residual tissue was identified. Images from VA Palo Alto, California.

EMR assessment of lesion border and residual tissue 

IEE with indigo carmine is commonly used to assess the lesion morphology and border to precisely direct EMR therapy. Immediately following mucosectomy, it is suggested to analyze the pit pattern of the tissue at the resection margins with indigo carmine IEE to assure completeness of resection. If residual neoplasm is present, further resection or ablative techniques can be directly applied130 (Figure 6). During EMR, it is important to ensure that the resection margins are free of neoplasm. Fibrosis may subsequently develop at the resection site, thus making any residual tissue difficult to endoscopically resect at a later date.67 Outcomes analysis of EMR of flat lesions >2 cm showed a reduction of local neoplastic recurrence from 8.7% to 0.5% (P < .01) following the implementation of the routine use of IEE with high magnification in tumor residual assessment.131

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 6. 

    NBI of a nonpolypoid colorectal adenoma. Nonpolypoid (IIa) colorectal lesion visualized with (A) standard and (B) NBI colonoscopy. The lesion was resected using EMR inject-and-cut technique. (C) Following resection, the borders are closely inspected for residual tissue. (D) Inspection with NBI shows an area of residual tissue (arrow). Argon plasma coagulation was then applied to the residual lesion for complete resection. Images from VA Palo Alto, California.

IEE in chronic ulcerative colitis 

Assessment of disease activity 

IEE with high magnification may provide an opportunity to assess disease activity of the entire colorectal mucosa rather than simply from a random and limited tissue sample. With indigo carmine IEE and high magnification, fine mucosal morphologic features can be visualized and interpreted24 (Figure 7). These changes have been correlated to be an independent risk factor for relapse during medical therapy. Fujiya et al reported that 7 (78%) of 9 patients with minute mucosal defects compared with only 2 (22%) of 9 patients without such changes experienced a relapse within 6 months.132

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 7. 

    Ulcerative lesion in a patient with long-standing ulcerative colitis. There was concern that the lesion contained an ulcerated neoplasm. (A) Ulcer in the center in the image. (B) Indigo carmine is applied for further visualization. (C) Magnification and (D) NBI show regenerative capillary features. There were no neoplastic changes in the biopsy specimen. Images from VA Palo Alto, CA.

Screening for nonpolypoid neoplasia 

Colitis-associated neoplasms can be difficult to detect, because the growth pattern of colitic dysplastic tissue is often multifocal and flat. IEE with high-magnification colonoscopy may potentially facilitate earlier detection of colitis-associated dysplasia because it may unveil such subtle lesions and provide a more targeted approach to surveillance.74, 133 Using IEE and high-resolution video endoscopy in 85 surveillance patients with ulcerative colitis, Jaramillo et al reported that 74% of all polyps were of flat morphology.75 Hata et al showed that the mucosal pit pattern is suggestive of the histology. Specifically, type I pit pattern corresponded to nondysplastic lesions, while type IIIL, IV, and V pit patterns corresponded well to dysplastic lesions.134 In a randomized controlled trial, Kiesslisch et al evaluated the use of dilute methylene blue (0.1%) solution sprayed throughout the colon at 30-cm segment intervals during surveillance colonoscopy in 165 patients with ulcerative colitis (for more than 8 years).35 Significantly more intraepithelial neoplasia (32 vs 10) was detected in the group that received methylene blue IEE of the entire colon compared with conventional colonoscopy with standard random biopsy protocol. They reported that both the sensitivity and specificity for differentiation between nonneoplastic and neoplastic lesions were 93%. Several other studies have shown similar increases in diagnostic yield of dysplasia using IEE.135, 136 As such, surveillance colonoscopy with IEE is recommended in patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis.137

IEE of the biliary system 

Peroral cholangioscopy has been used to directly visualize biliary lesions that are challenging to differentiate by cholangiography or endosonography.138, 139, 140, 141, 142 It has been used to target biopsies to aid in diagnosis of biliary duct disease. Itoi et al described a prospective case series of 12 patients with biliary tract diseases (7 bile duct cancers and 5 benign biliary diseases) diagnosed using peroral cholangioscopy.143 They report improved targeted biopsies, using peroral cholangioscopy with NBI, and speculate that NBI may be helpful for the observation of fine mucosal structures and vessels.

Back to Article Outline

Conclusions 

IEE has been applied as an adjunctive endoscopic diagnostic and treatment tool in specialized academic centers but is otherwise not currently in widespread use. There are sufficient data to support its use in the detection of early squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus and in the management of early gastric cancer and superficial colorectal lesions. Potential barriers to the dissemination of IEE include perceptions of its inefficiency and exuberant cost, inadequate mechanism for reimbursement, lack of standardized training in techniques, and deficiency of high-quality comparison studies. The recent introduction of optical and electronic IEE may expand its clinical adaptation and encourage further research of the efficacy, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of IEE in diagnostic and interventional gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Back to Article Outline

 

The Clinical Practice and Economics Committee acknowledges the following individuals whose critiques of this review paper provided valuable guidance to the authors: Robert S. Bresalier, MD; Marcia I. Canto, MD, MHS; Norman Emilio Marcon, MD; Norman S. Nishioka, MD.

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Muto M, Nakane M, Katada C, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma in situ at oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal mucosal sites. Cancer. 2004;101:1375–1381
  2. Muto M, Katada C, Sano Y, et al. Narrow band imaging: a new diagnostic approach to visualize angiogenesis in superficial neoplasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;3:S16–S20
  3. Inoue H, Rey JF, Lightdale C. Lugol chromoendoscopy for esophageal squamous cell cancer. Endoscopy. 2001;33:75–79
  4. Soehendra N, Binmoeller KF, Bohnacker S, et al. Endoscopic snare mucosectomy in the esophagus without any additional equipment: a simple technique for resection of flat early cancer. Endoscopy. 1997;29:380–383
  5. Gotoda T, Yanagisawa A, Sasako M, et al. Incidence of lymph node metastasis from early gastric cancer: estimation with a large number of cases at two large centers. Gastric Cancer. 2000;3:219–225
  6. Suzuki H. Endoscopic mucosal resection using ligating device for early gastric cancer. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am. 2001;11:511–518
  7. Kudo S, Kashida H, Tamura T, et al. Colonoscopic diagnosis and management of nonpolypoid early colorectal cancer. World J Surg. 2000;24:1081–1090
  8. Fujii T, Rembacken BJ, Dixon MF, et al. Flat adenomas in the United Kingdom: are treatable cancers being missed?. Endoscopy. 1998;30:437–443
  9. Soetikno R, Friedland S, Kaltenbach T, et al. Nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:566–576
  10. Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, et al. Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK. Lancet. 2000;355:1211–1214
  11. Gono K, Obi T, Yamaguchi M, et al. Appearance of enhanced tissue features in narrow-band endoscopic imaging. J Biomed Opt. 2004;9:568–577
  12. Gono K, Yamazaki K, Doguchi N, et al. Endoscopic observation of tissue by narrowband illumination. Opt Rev. 2003;10:211–215
  13. Machida H, Sano Y, Hamamoto Y, et al. Narrow-band imaging in the diagnosis of colorectal mucosal lesions: a pilot study. Endoscopy. 2004;36:1094–1098
  14. Nakayoshi T, Tajiri H, Matsuda K, et al. Magnifying endoscopy combined with narrow band imaging system for early gastric cancer: correlation of vascular pattern with histopathology (including video). Endoscopy. 2004;36:1080–1084
  15. Kida M, Kobayashi K, Saigenji K. Routine chromoendoscopy for gastrointestinal diseases: indications revised. Endoscopy. 2003;35:590–596
  16. Shim CS. Staining in gastrointestinal endoscopy: clinical applications and limitations. Endoscopy. 1999;31:487–496
  17. Fujii T, Hasegawa RT, Saitoh Y, et al. Chromoscopy during colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2001;33:1036–1041
  18. Canto MI. Chromoendoscopy and magnifying endoscopy for Barrett’s esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;3:S12–S15
  19. Jung M, Kiesslich R. Chromoendoscopy and intravital staining techniques. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 1999;13:11–19
  20. Dawsey SM, Fleischer DE, Wang GQ, et al. Mucosal iodine staining improves endoscopic visualization of squamous dysplasia and squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus in Linxian, China. Cancer. 1998;83:220–231
  21. Meyer V, Burtin P, Bour B, et al. Endoscopic detection of early esophageal cancer in a high-risk population: does Lugol staining improve videoendoscopy?. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;45:480–484
  22. Yokoyama A, Ohmori T, Makuuchi H, et al. Successful screening for early esophageal cancer in alcoholics using endoscopy and mucosa iodine staining. [see comments] Cancer. 1995;76:928–934
  23. Okumura T, Aruga H, Inohara H, et al. Endoscopic examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract for the presence of second primary cancers in head and neck cancer patients. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1993;501:103–106
  24. Muto M, Hironaka S, Nakane M, et al. Association of multiple Lugol-voiding lesions with synchronous and metachronous esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in patients with head and neck cancer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:517–521
  25. Tincani AJ, Brandalise N, Altemani A, et al. Diagnosis of superficial esophageal cancer and dysplasia using endoscopic screening with a 2% lugol dye solution in patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck. 2000;22:170–174
  26. Ribeiro U, Posner MC, Safatle-Ribeiro AV, et al. Risk factors for squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. Br J Surg. 1996;83:1174–1185
  27. Tanabe H, Yokota K, Shibata N, et al. Alcohol consumption as a major risk factor in the development of early esophageal cancer in patients with head and neck cancer. Intern Med. 2001;40:692–696
  28. Yokoyama A, Ohmori T, Makuuchi H, et al. Successful screening for early esophageal cancer in alcoholics using endoscopy and mucosa iodine staining. Cancer. 1995;76:928–934
  29. Hashimoto CL, Iriya K, Baba ER, et al. Lugol’s dye spray chromoendoscopy establishes early diagnosis of esophageal cancer in patients with primary head and neck cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:275–282
  30. Kondo H, Fukuda H, Ono H, et al. Sodium thiosulfate solution spray for relief of irritation caused by Lugol’s stain in chromoendoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;53:199–202
  31. Thuler FP, de Paulo GA, Ferrari AP. Chemical esophagitis after chromoendoscopy with Lugol’s solution for esophageal cancer: case report. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:925–926
  32. Stevens PD, Lightdale CJ, Green PH, et al. Combined magnification endoscopy with chromoendoscopy for the evaluation of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;40:747–749
  33. Canto MI, Setrakian S, Petras RE, et al. Methylene blue selectively stains intestinal metaplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44:1–7
  34. Meining A, Rosch T, Kiesslich R, et al. Inter- and intra-observer variability of magnification chromoendoscopy for detecting specialized intestinal metaplasia at the gastroesophageal junction. Endoscopy. 2004;36:160–164
  35. Kiesslich R, Fritsch J, Holtmann M, et al. Methylene blue-aided chromoendoscopy for the detection of intraepithelial neoplasia and colon cancer in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:880–888
  36. Canto MI, Setrakian S, Willis J, et al. Methylene blue-directed biopsies improve detection of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;51:560–568
  37. Canto MI. Methylene blue chromoendoscopy for Barrett’s esophagus: coming soon to your GI unit?. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:403–409
  38. Olliver JR, Wild CP, Sahay P, et al. Chromoendoscopy with methylene blue and associated DNA damage in Barrett’s oesophagus. Lancet. 2003;362:373–374
  39. Rey JF, Inoue H, Guelrud M. Magnification endoscopy with acetic acid for Barrett’s esophagus. Endoscopy. 2005;37:583–586
  40. Lambert R, Rey JF, Sankaranarayanan R. Magnification and chromoscopy with the acetic acid test. Endoscopy. 2003;35:437–445
  41. Yagi K, Aruga Y, Nakamura A, et al. The study of dynamic chemical magnifying endoscopy in gastric neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62:963–969
  42. Tajiri H, Ohtsu A, Boku N, et al. Routine endoscopy using electronic endoscopes for gastric cancer diagnosis: retrospective study of inconsistencies between endoscopic and biopsy diagnoses. Cancer Detect Prev. 2001;25:166–173
  43. Soetikno R, Friedland S, Kaltenbach T, et al. Nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:566–576quiz 588–589
  44. Togashi K, Konishi F, Ishizuka T, et al. Efficacy of magnifying endoscopy in the differential diagnosis of neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps of the large bowel. Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42:1602–1608
  45. Fu KI, Sano Y, Kato S, et al. Chromoendoscopy using indigo carmine dye spraying with magnifying observation is the most reliable method for differential diagnosis between non-neoplastic and neoplastic colorectal lesions: a prospective study. Endoscopy. 2004;36:1089–1093
  46. Tung SY, Wu CS, Su MY. Magnifying colonoscopy in differentiating neoplastic from nonneoplastic colorectal lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:2628–2632
  47. Miyake Y, Takeuchi S, Yamataka S. Development of new electronic endoscopes using the spectral images of an internal organ. 2005;Proceeding of the CIC International Conference: Communications in Computing
  48. Kusaka T, Torii A, Takeda Y, et al. Diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus and adenocarcinoma: including diagnosis of vascular patterns. Endosc Dig. 2005;17:2085–2091
  49. Pohl J, May A, Rabenstein T, et al. Computed virtual chromoendoscopy: a new tool for enhancing tissue surface structures. Endoscopy. 2007;39:80–83
  50. Richards-Kortum R, Sevick-Muraca E. Quantitative optical spectroscopy for tissue diagnosis. Annu Rev Phys Chem. 1996;47:555–606
  51. Uedo N, Ishihara R, Iishi H, et al. A new method of diagnosing gastric intestinal metaplasia: narrow-band imaging with magnifying endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2006;38:819–824
  52. Kara MA, Peters FP, Fockens P, et al. Endoscopic video-autofluorescence imaging followed by narrow band imaging for detecting early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:176–185
  53. Kara MA, Peters FP, Ten Kate FJ, et al. Endoscopic video autofluorescence imaging may improve the detection of early neoplasia in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:679–685
  54. Niepsuj K, Niepsuj G, Cebula W, et al. Autofluorescence endoscopy for detection of high-grade dysplasia in short-segment Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58:715–719
  55. Borovicka J, Fischer J, Neuweiler J, et al. Autofluorescence endoscopy in surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus: a multicenter randomized trial on diagnostic efficacy. Endoscopy. 2006;38:867–872
  56. Kudo S, Tamura S, Nakajima T, et al. Diagnosis of colorectal tumorous lesions by magnifying endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44:8–14
  57. Oka S, Tanaka S, Nagata S, et al. Relationship between histopathological features and type V pit pattern determined by magnifying videocolonoscopy in early colorectal carcinoma. Dig Endosc. 2005;17:117–122
  58. Kato S, Fujii T, Sano Y, et al. Assessment of colorectal lesions using magnifying colonoscopy and mucosal dye spraying: can significant lesions be distinguished?. Endoscopy. 2001;33:306–310
  59. Kiesslich R, von Bergh M, Hahn M, et al. Chromoendoscopy with indigocarmine improves the detection of adenomatous and nonadenomatous lesions in the colon. Endoscopy. 2001;33:1001–1006
  60. Konishi K, Kaneko K, Kurahashi T, et al. A comparison of magnifying and nonmagnifying colonoscopy for diagnosis of colorectal polyps: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:48–53
  61. Hurlstone DP, Cross SS, Adam I, et al. Efficacy of high magnification chromoscopic colonoscopy for the diagnosis of neoplasia in flat and depressed lesions of the colorectum: a prospective analysis. Gut. 2004;53:284–290
  62. Nagata S, Tanaka S, Haruma K, et al. Pit pattern diagnosis of early colorectal carcinoma by magnifying colonoscopy: clinical and histological implications. Int J Oncol. 2000;16:927–934
  63. Oka SKI, Mohri R, Chayama K. Diagnosis of the invasion depth using magnifying videocolonoscopy in early colorectal cancer (in Japanese). Early Colorectal Cancer. 2005;9:161–168
  64. Tanaka S, Haruma K, Nagata S, et al. Diagnosis of invasion depth in early colorectal carcinoma by pit pattern analysis with magnifying endoscopy. Dig Endosc. 2001;13:S2–S5
  65. Hurlstone DP, Shorthouse AJ, Cross SS, et al. High-magnification chromoscopic pouchoscopy: a novel in vivo technique for surveillance of the anal transition zone and columnar cuff following ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Tech Coloproctol. 2004;8:173–178discussion 178
  66. Hurlstone DP, Cross SS, Brown S, et al. A prospective evaluation of high-magnification chromoscopic colonoscopy in predicting completeness of EMR. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:642–650
  67. Soetikno RM, Gotoda T, Nakanishi Y, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:567–579
  68. Rembacken BJ, Gotoda T, Fujii T, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection. Endoscopy. 2001;33:709–718
  69. Soetikno RM, Friedland S, Kaltenbach TR, et al. Non-polypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:566–576
  70. Matsumoto T, Kuroki F, Mizuno M, et al. Application of magnifying chromoscopy for the assessment of severity in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;46:400–405
  71. Kunihiro M, Tanaka S, Sumii M, et al. Magnifying colonoscopic features of ulcerative colitis reflect histologic inflammation. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2004;10:737–744
  72. Hurlstone DP, Cross SS, Lobo AJ. High-magnification chromoscopic ileoscopy in familial adenomatous polyposis: detection in vivo of colonic metaplasia and microadenoma formation. Endoscopy. 2004;36:194
  73. Hurlstone DP, Fujii T. Practical uses of chromoendoscopy and magnification at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am. 2005;15:687–702
  74. Hurlstone DP, Sanders DS, Lobo AJ, et al. Indigo carmine-assisted high-magnification chromoscopic colonoscopy for the detection and characterisation of intraepithelial neoplasia in ulcerative colitis: a prospective evaluation. Endoscopy. 2005;37:1186–1192
  75. Jaramillo E, Watanabe M, Slezak P, et al. Flat neoplastic lesions of the colon and rectum detected by high-resolution video endoscopy and chromoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;42:114–122
  76. Tanaka S, Haruma K, Ito M, et al. Detailed colonoscopy for detecting early superficial carcinoma: recent developments. J Gastroenterol. 2000;35(Suppl 12):121–125
  77. Inoue H, Kudo SE, Shiokawa A. Novel endoscopic imaging techniques toward in vivo observation of living cancer cells in the gastrointestinal tract. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;3:S61–S63
  78. Inoue H, Kudo SE, Shiokawa A. Technology insight: Laser-scanning confocal microscopy and endocytoscopy for cellular observation of the gastrointestinal tract. Natl Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;2:31–37
  79. Kodashima S, Fujishiro M, Takubo K, et al. Ex-vivo study of high-magnification chromoendoscopy in the gastrointestinal tract to determine the optimal staining conditions for endocytoscopy. Endoscopy. 2006;38:1115–1121
  80. Kumagai Y, Monma K, Kawada K. Magnifying chromoendoscopy of the esophagus: in-vivo pathological diagnosis using an endocytoscopy system. Endoscopy. 2004;36:590–594
  81. Sasajima K, Kudo SE, Inoue H, et al. Real-time in vivo virtual histology of colorectal lesions when using the endocytoscopy system. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:1010–1017
  82. Inoue H, Sasajima K, Kaga M, et al. Endoscopic in vivo evaluation of tissue atypia in the esophagus using a newly designed integrated endocytoscope: a pilot trial. Endoscopy. 2006;38:891–895
  83. Kiesslich R, Hoffman A, Goetz M, et al. In vivo diagnosis of collagenous colitis by confocal endomicroscopy. Gut. 2006;55:591–592
  84. Kiesslich R, Gossner L, Goetz M, et al. In vivo histology of Barrett’s esophagus and associated neoplasia by confocal laser endomicroscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:979–987
  85. Polglase AL, McLaren WJ, Skinner SA, et al. A fluorescence confocal endomicroscope for in vivo microscopy of the upper- and the lower-GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62:686–695
  86. Kimura S, Inoue H, Sato Y, et al. Ex vivo visualization of Helicobacter pylori using an endocytoscopic probe. Biomed Res. 2006;27:255–257
  87. Kiesslich R, Goetz M, Burg J, et al. Diagnosing Helicobacter pylori in vivo by confocal laser endoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2005;128:2119–2123
  88. Katada C, Muto M, Manabe T, et al. Local recurrence of squamous-cell carcinoma of the esophagus after EMR. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:219–225
  89. Yoshida T, Inoue H, Usui S, et al. Narrow-band imaging system with magnifying endoscopy for superficial esophageal lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:288–295
  90. Kiesslich R, Hahn M, Herrmann G, et al. Screening for specialized columnar epithelium with methylene blue: chromoendoscopy in patients with Barrett’s esophagus and a normal control group. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;53:47–52
  91. Sharma P, Topalovski M, Mayo MS, et al. Methylene blue chromoendoscopy for detection of short-segment Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:289–293
  92. Sharma P, McQuaid K, Dent J, et al. A critical review of the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus: the AGA Chicago Workshop. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:310–330
  93. Canto MI, Setrakian S, Willis JE, et al. Methylene blue staining of dysplastic and nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus: an in vivo and ex vivo study. Endoscopy. 2001;33:391–400
  94. Gossner L, Pech O, May A, et al. Comparison of methylene blue-directed biopsies and four-quadrant biopsies in the detection of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and early cancer in Barrett’s oesophagus. Dig Liver Dis. 2006;38:724–729
  95. Wo JM, Ray MB, Mayfield-Stokes S, et al. Comparison of methylene blue-directed biopsies and conventional biopsies in the detection of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus: a preliminary study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:294–301
  96. Lim CH, Rotimi O, Dexter SP, et al. Randomized crossover study that used methylene blue or random 4-quadrant biopsy for the diagnosis of dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:195–199
  97. Kara MA, Peters FP, Rosmolen WD, et al. High-resolution endoscopy plus chromoendoscopy or narrow-band imaging in Barrett’s esophagus: a prospective randomized crossover study. Endoscopy. 2005;37:929–936
  98. Tabuchi M, Sueoka N, Fujimori T. Videoendoscopy with vital double dye staining (crystal violet and methylene blue) for detection of a minute focus of early stage adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus: a case report. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54:385–388
  99. Amano Y, Komazawa Y, Ishimura N, et al. Two cases of superficial cancer in Barrett’s esophagus detected by chromoendoscopy with crystal violet. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:143–146
  100. Endo T, Awakawa T, Takahashi H, et al. Classification of Barrett’s epithelium by magnifying endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;55:641–647
  101. Yagi K, Nakamura A, Sekine A. Accuracy of magnifying endoscopy with methylene blue in the diagnosis of specialized intestinal metaplasia and short-segment Barrett’s esophagus in Japanese patients without Helicobacter pylori infection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58:189–195
  102. Sharma P, Weston AP, Topalovski M, et al. Magnification chromoendoscopy for the detection of intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2003;52:24–27
  103. Guelrud M, Herrera I, Essenfeld H, et al. Enhanced magnification endoscopy: a new technique to identify specialized intestinal metaplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;53:559–565
  104. Toyoda H, Rubio C, Befrits R, et al. Detection of intestinal metaplasia in distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction by enhanced-magnification endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:15–21
  105. Hoffman A, Kiesslich R, Bender A, et al. Acetic acid-guided biopsies after magnifying endoscopy compared with random biopsies in the detection of Barrett’s esophagus: a prospective randomized trial with crossover design. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:1–8
  106. Hamamoto Y, Endo T, Nosho K, et al. Usefulness of narrow-band imaging endoscopy for diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus. J Gastroenterol. 2004;39:14–20
  107. Sharma P, Bansal A, Mathur S, et al. The utility of a novel narrow band imaging endoscopy system in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:167–175
  108. Kara MA, Ennahachi M, Fockens P, et al. Detection and classification of the mucosal and vascular patterns (mucosal morphology) in Barrett’s esophagus by using narrow band imaging. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64:155–166
  109. Goda K, Tajiri H, Ikegami M, et al. Usefulness of magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging for the detection of specialized intestinal metaplasia in columnar-lined esophagus and Barrett’s adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:36–46
  110. Dinis-Ribeiro M, da Costa-Pereira A, Lopes C, et al. Magnification chromoendoscopy for the diagnosis of gastric intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:498–504
  111. Morales TG, Bhattacharyya A, Camargo E, et al. Methylene blue staining for intestinal metaplasia of the gastric cardia with follow-up for dysplasia. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;48:26–31
  112. Sumiyama K, Kaise M, Nakayoshi T, et al. Combined use of a magnifying endoscope with a narrow band imaging system and a multibending endoscope for en bloc EMR of early stage gastric cancer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:79–84
  113. Kiesslich R, Mergener K, Naumann C, et al. Value of chromoendoscopy and magnification endoscopy in the evaluation of duodenal abnormalities: a prospective, randomized comparison. Endoscopy. 2003;35:559–563
  114. Siegel LM, Stevens PD, Lightdale CJ, et al. Combined magnification endoscopy with chromoendoscopy in the evaluation of patients with suspected malabsorption. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997;46:226–230
  115. Guelrud M, Ehrlich EE. Enhanced magnification endoscopy in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am. 2004;14:461–473viii
  116. Niveloni S, Fiorini A, Dezi R, et al. Usefulness of videoduodenoscopy and vital dye staining as indicators of mucosal atrophy of celiac disease: assessment of interobserver agreement. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47:223–229
  117. Chiu HM, Chang CY, Chen CC, et al. A prospective comparative study of narrow-band imaging, chromoendoscopy, and conventional colonoscopy in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Gut. 2007;56:373–379
  118. Sano Y, Horimatsu T, Fu KI, et al. Magnifying observation of microvascular architecture of colorectal lesions using narrow band imaging system. Dig Endosc. 2006;18:S44–S51
  119. Hirata M, Tanaka S, Oka S, et al. Magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging for diagnosis of colorectal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:988–995
  120. Dekker E, van den Broek FJ, Reitsma JB, et al. Narrow-band imaging compared with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of dysplasia in patients with longstanding ulcerative colitis. Endoscopy. 2007;39:216–221
  121. Hurlstone DP, Cross SS, Adam I, et al. A prospective clinicopathological and endoscopic evaluation of flat and depressed colorectal lesions in the United Kingdom. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2543–2549
  122. Soetikno RM, Fujii T, Friedland S, et al. Diagnosis of flat and depressed colorectal neoplasms—an educational DVD (ASGE Learning Center). Chicago, IL: American Society Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; 2004;
  123. Tsuda S, Veress B, Toth E, et al. Flat and depressed colorectal tumours in a southern Swedish population: a prospective chromoendoscopic and histopathological study. Gut. 2002;51:550–555
  124. Lee JH, Kim JW, Cho YK, et al. Detection of colorectal adenomas by routine chromoendoscopy with indigocarmine. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:1284–1288
  125. Mitooka H, Fujimori T, Ohno S, et al. Chromoscopy of the colon using indigo carmine dye with electrolyte lavage solution. Gastrointest Endosc. 1992;38:373–374
  126. Trecca A, Gaj F, Di Lorenzo GP, et al. Improved detection of colorectal neoplasms with selective use of chromoendoscopy in 2005 consecutive patients. Tech Coloproctol. 2006;10:339–344
  127. Le Rhun M, Coron E, Parlier D, et al. High resolution colonoscopy with chromoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for the detection of colonic neoplasia: a randomized study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:349–354
  128. Rex DK, Helbig CC. High yields of small and flat adenomas with high definition colonoscopes using either white light or narrow band imaging. Gastroenterology. 2007;133:42–47
  129. Hurlstone DP, Sanders DS, Cross SS, et al. Colonoscopic resection of lateral spreading tumours: a prospective analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection. Gut. 2004;53:1334–1339
  130. Brooker JC, Saunders BP, Shah SG, et al. Total colonic dye-spray increases the detection of diminutive adenomas during routine colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:333–338
  131. Tanaka SOS, Chayama K. Endoscopic mucosal resection for superficial early colorectal carcinoma (Indication, choice of method and outcome). Gastroenterol Endosc. 2004;46:243–252
  132. Fujiya M, Saitoh Y, Nomura M, et al. Minute findings by magnifying colonoscopy are useful for the evaluation of ulcerative colitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:535–542
  133. Bernstein CN. The color of dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:1135;118
  134. Hata K, Watanabe T, Motoi T, et al. Pitfalls of pit pattern diagnosis in ulcerative colitis-associated dysplasia. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:374–376
  135. Rutter MD, Saunders BP, Schofield G, et al. Pancolonic indigo carmine dye spraying for the detection of dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gut. 2004;53:256–260
  136. Sada M, Igarashi M, Yoshizawa S, et al. Dye spraying and magnifying endoscopy for dysplasia and cancer surveillance in ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47:1816–1823
  137. Itzkowitz SH, Present DH. Consensus conference: colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2005;11:314–321
  138. Nakajima M, Akasaka Y, Fukumoto K, et al. Peroral cholangiopancreatosocopy (PCPS) under duodenoscopic guidance. Am J Gastroenterol. 1976;66:241–247
  139. Rosch W, Koch H. Peroral cholangioscopy in choledocho-duodenostomy--patients using the pediatric fiberscope. Endoscopy. 1978;10:195–198
  140. Kozarek RA. Direct cholangioscopy and pancreatoscopy at time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Am J Gastroenterol. 1988;83:55–57
  141. Siddique I, Galati J, Ankoma-Sey V, et al. The role of choledochoscopy in the diagnosis and management of biliary tract diseases. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:67–73
  142. Fukuda Y, Tsuyuguchi T, Sakai Y, et al. Diagnostic utility of peroral cholangioscopy for various bile-duct lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;62:374–382
  143. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, et al. Peroral cholangioscopic diagnosis of biliary-tract diseases by using narrow-band imaging (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:730–736

PII: S0016-5085(07)01942-7

doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2007.10.062

Gastroenterology
Volume 134, Issue 1 , Pages 327-340, January 2008