Authors (year) | Design | Dye | Number of patients | Patients with dysplasia | Comparison endoscopy | Dysplasia detection rate |
Kiesslich et al (2003) Germany32 | Randomised | MB 0.1% | 165 | 13 | SD-WLE | 32 vs 10 DL |
Matsumoto et al (2003) Japan54 | Prospective cohort | IC 0.2% | 57 | 12 | SD-WLE | 86% vs 38% sensitivity |
Rutter et al (2004) UK33 | Prospective cohort/crossover | IC 0.1% | 100 | 7 | SD-WLE | 9 vs 2 DL |
Hurlstone et al (2005) UK55 | Prospective cohort | IC 0.5% | 700 | 81 | SD-WLE | 69 vs 24 DL |
Kiesslich et al (2007) Germany56 | Randomised | MB 0.1% | 153 | 15 | SD-WLE | 19 vs 4 DL |
Marion et al (2008) USA57 | Tandem colonoscopy | MB 0.1% | 102 | 19 | SD-WLE | 17 vs 3 patients with DL |
Günther et al (2011) Germany58 | Randomised | IC 0.1% | 150 | 6 | SD-WLE | 6 vs 0 patients with DL |
Hlavaty et al (2011) Slovakia59 | Tandem colonoscopy | IC 0.4% | 20 | 7 | SD-WLE | 7 vs 0 DL |
Picco et al (2013) USA60 | Crossover | IC 0.2% | 75 | 16 | HD-WLE | 22 vs 10 DL |
Freire et al (2014) Portugal61 | Randomised, parallel-group | MB 0.1% | 72 | 6 | SD-WLE | 7 vs 6 DL |
Mohammed et al (2015) UK37 | Randomised, parallel-group | IC 0.2% | 103 | 11 | HD-WLE | 14 vs 6 DL |
Carballal et al (2016) Spain62 | Crossover | IC 0.4% | 350 | N/A | SD/HD-WLE | 94 vs 40 DL |
Iacucci et al (2016) Canada63 | Randomised | IC0.03% or MB 0.04% | 180 | 22 | HD-WLE | 42 vs 27 |
Park et al (2016) Korea64 | Randomised | IC | 210 | N/A | HD-WLE | 20.6% vs 12.0% |
CE, chromoendoscopy;DL, dysplastic lesion;HD-WLE, high-definition white-light endoscopy;IC, indigo carmine;MB, methylene blue; SD-WLE, standard definition white-light endoscopy.