EVIS EXERA III Endoscopy System Imagine... Tomorrow is Now

The Future of Endoscopy Today

Your benefits Recommended downloads

IMAGINE... Tomorrow is Now

The technologies contained in the EVIS EXERA III endoscopy system can help you realize the future of endoscopy today, with tangible benefits for both staff and patients. Learn here about how Olympus technologies can contribute to the future of your department - and how numerous studies have proven the benefits of EVIS EXERA III.

One System: EVIS EXERA III

Realize Future Endoscopy Today

Learn more and contact the Olympus expert

Technologies

The EVIS EXERA III endoscopy system contains a variety of innovative technologies such as Narrow Band Imaging (NBI), Dual Focus, and Responsive Insertion Technology (RIT). These technologies have been proven in numerous clinical studies to enhance diagnostic and therapeutic quality, save resources, and help to provide greater comfort to patients.

Narrow Band Imaging (NBI)

A New Wave of Diagnostic Possibilities

  • Improves visibility of blood vessels and mucosal structures
  • Facilitates observation of tumors typically aggregating blood vessels
  • Uses only wavelengths absorbed by hemoglobin for maximum contrast
  • Optical image technology available at the push of a button

Dual Focus

A New Level of Visualization

  • Two-stage optical technology for precise observation of mucosal surfaces
  • Easy to operate at the push of a button, no need to adjust focus
  • Advanced diagnosis packaged in a routine endoscope

ScopeGuide

Navigated Colonoscopy

  • Shows an accurate 3D reconstruction of position and configuration of a colonoscope along with the endoscopic image
  • Makes navigation through the colon easier
  • Helps to identify loops and to remove them
  • Helpful for novice and experienced physicians

Responsive Insertion Technology (RIT)

Enhanced Procedural Efficiency

  • Proprietary Olympus technologies improving colonoscope maneuverability and handling
  • Improves response of the scope during torque and push maneuvers
  • Avoids the candy-stick phenomenon when passing flexures
  • Facilitates better straightening of the scope

Clinical Studies

  1. 1.Update on Endoscopic Tissue Sampling Devices. Technology Assessment Committe et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 May;63(6):741-5.
  2. 2.The Role of Endoscopy in Barrett‘s Esophagus and Other Premalignant Conditions of the Esophagus. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Evans JA et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Dec;76(6):1087-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.08.004.
  3. 3.American Gastroenterological Association Institute Guideline on the Role of Upper Gastrointestinal Biopsy to Evaluate Dyspepsia in the Adult Patient in the Absence of Visible Mucosal Lesions Yang YX, Brill J et al. Gastroenterology. 2015 Oct;149(4):1082-7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.07.039. Epub 2015 Aug 14.
  4. 4.The Role of Endoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 May;81(5):1101-21.e1-13. doi: 10.1016/j. ie.2014.10.030. Epub 2015 Mar 20.
  1. 5.The Seattle Protocol Does Not More Reliably Predict the Detection of Cancer at the Time of Esophagectomy Than a Less Intensive Surveillance Protocol Kariv R, Plesec TP et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jun;7(6):653-8; quiz 606. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2008.11.024. Epub 2008 Dec 13.
  2. 6.Random Biopsies Taken During Colonoscopic Surveillance of Patients with Longstanding Ulcerative Colitis: Low Yield and Absence of Clinical Consequences van den Broek FJ, Stokkers PC et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 May;109(5):715-22. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.93. Epub 2011 Mar 22.
  3. 7.Validation of a Simple Classification System for Endoscopic Diagnosis of Small Colorectal Polyps Using Narrow-Band Imaging Hewett DG, Kaltenbach T et al. Gastroenterology. 2012 Sep;143(3):599-607.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.05.006. Epub 2012 May 15.
  4. 8.Endoscopic Prediction of Deep Submucosal Invasive Carcinoma: Validation of the Narrow-Band Imaging International Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE) Classification Hayashi N, Tanaka S et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Oct;78(4):625-32. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.04.185. Epub 2013 Jul 30.
  1. 9.Narrow-Band Imaging with Dual Focus Magnification in Differentiating Colorectal Neoplasia Singh R, Jayanna M et al. Dig Endosc. 2013 May;25 Suppl 2:16-20. doi: 10.1111/den.12075.
  2. 10.Standard Endoscopy with Random Biopsies Versus Narrow Band Imaging Targeted Biopsies in Barrett‘s Oesophagus: A Prospective, International, Randomised Controlled Trial Sharma P, Hawes RH et al. Gut. 2013 Jan;62(1):15-21. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300962. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
  3. 11.Advanced Imaging Technologies Increase Detection of Dysplasia and Neoplasia in Patients with Barrett‘s Esophagus: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review Qumseya BJ, Wang H et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 Dec;11(12):1562-70.e1-2. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2013.06.017. Epub 2013 Jul 12.
  4. 12.White-Light or Narrow-Band Imaging Colonoscopy in Surveillance of Ulcerative Colitis: A Prospective Multicenter Study Leifeld L, Rogler G et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Oct;13(10):1776-1781.e1. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2015.04.172. Epub 2015 May 5.
  1. 17.Adenoma Detection Rate Is not Influenced by the Timing of Colonoscopy When Performed in Half-Day Blocks Gurudu SR, Ratuapli SK et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Aug;106(8):1466-71. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.125. Epub 2011 Apr 19.
  2. 18.A Patient-Blinded Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Air Insufflation, Water Immersion, and Water Exchange During Minimally Sedated Colonoscopy Hsieh YH, Koo M et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Sep;109(9):1390-400. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.126. Epub 2014 Jun 3.
  3. 19.High Definition Colonoscopy vs. Standard Video Endoscopy for the Detection of Colonic Polyps: A Meta-Analysis Subramanian V, Mannath J et al. Endoscopy. 2011 Jun;43(6):499-505. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256207. Epub 2011 Feb 28.
  4. 20.Detection of Colorectal Adenoma by Narrow Band Imaging (HQ190) vs. High-Definition White Light Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial Leung WK, Lo OS et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jun;109(6):855-63. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.83. Epub 2014 Apr 22.
  1. 21.Next-Generation Narrow Band Imaging System for Colonic Polyp Detection: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Trial Horimatsu T, Sano Y et al. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2015 Jul;30(7):947-54. doi: 10.1007/s00384-015-2230-x. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
  2. 22.Narrow Band Imaging to Differentiate Neoplastic and Non-Neoplastic Colorectal Polyps in Real Time: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Operating Characteristics McGill SK, Evangelou E et al. Gut. 2013 Dec;62(12):1704-13. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303965. Epub 2013 Jan 7.
  3. 23.Diagnostic Performance of Narrowed Spectrum Endoscopy, Autofluorescence Imaging, and Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for Optical Diagnosis of Colonic Polyps: A Meta-Analysis Wanders LK, East JE et al. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Dec;14(13):1337-47. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70509-6. Epub 2013 Nov 13.
  4. 24.ASGE Technology Committee Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Assessing the ASGE PIVI Thresholds for Adopting Real-Time Endoscopic Assessment of the Histology of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps ASGE Technology Committee et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Mar;81(3):502.e1-502.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.12.022. Epub 2015 Jan 16.
  1. 25.Real-Time Optical Diagnosis for Diminutive Colorectal Polyps Using Narrow-Band Imaging: The VALID Randomised Clinical Trial Kaltenbach T, Rastogi A et al. Gut. 2015 Oct;64(10):1569-77. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307742. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
  2. 26.Advanced Imaging for Detection and Differentiation of Colorectal Neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline Kamiński MF, Hassan C et al. Endoscopy. 2014 May;46(5):435-49. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1365348. Epub 2014 Mar 17.
  3. 27.An Analysis of the Learning Curve to Achieve Competency at Colonoscopy Using the JETS Database Ward ST, Mohammed MA et al. Gut. 2014 Nov;63(11):1746-54. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305973. Epub 2014 Jan 27.
  4. 28.Patient Pain During Colonoscopy: An Analysis Using Real-Time Magnetic Endoscope Imaging Shah SG, Brooker JC et al. Endoscopy. 2002 Jun;34(6):435-40.
  1. 29.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging Versus Standard Colonoscopy in a Routine Colonoscopy Setting: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Holme Ö, Höie O et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1215-22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.054. Epub 2011 Apr 8.
  2. 30.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging Versus Standard Colonoscopy: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Chen Y, Duan YT et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 7;19(41):7197-204. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.7197.
  3. 31.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging as an Adjuvant to Elective Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Mark-Christensen A et al. Endoscopy. 2015 Mar;47(3):251-61. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1390767. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
  4. 32.Does “Responsive Insertion Technology” Improve Practice of Colonoscopy? Results of a Randomized Study Cuesta R, Sola-Vera J et al. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014 Mar;49(3):355-61. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2013.871576. Epub 2014 Jan 13.
  1. 33.Conscious Sedation and Analgesia in Colonoscopy [...] Khajavi M, Emami A et al. Anesth Pain Med. 2013 Summer;3(1):208-13. doi: 10.5812/aapm.9653. Epub 2013 Jul 1.
  2. 34.Safety Analysis of Endoscopist-Directed [...] Sieg A; bng-Study-Group et al. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Mar;29(3):517-23.
  3. 35.Position Change During Colonoscope Withdrawal Increases Polyp and Adenoma Detection in the Right but not in the Left Side of the Colon: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Ball AJ, Johal SS et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep;82(3):488-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.035. Epub 2015 Apr 22.
  4. 36.Variable Stiffness Colonoscope Versus Regular Adult Colonoscope: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Othman MO, Bradley AG et al. Endoscopy. 2009 Jan;41(1):17-24. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1103488. Epub 2009 Jan 21.
  1. 37.[...] Sedation for Colonoscopy with a New Ultrathin or a Standard Endoscope: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study Töx U, Schumacher B et al. Endoscopy. 2013 Jun;45(6):439-44. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326270. Epub 2013 Mar 6.
  2. 38.Long-Term Colorectal-Cancer Incidence and Mortality after Lower Endoscopy Nishihara R, Wu K et al. N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 19;369(12):1095-105. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1301969
  3. 39.The Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using Faecal Immunochemical Test Versus Colonoscopy Wong MC, Ching JY et al. Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 4;5:13568. doi: 10.1038/srep13568.
  4. 40.Trends in Adenoma Detection Rates During the First 10 Years of the German Screening Colonoscopy Program Brenner H, Altenhofen L et al. Gastroenterology. 2015 Aug;149(2):356-66.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.012. Epub 2015 Apr 22.
  1. 41.Global Epidemiology of Barrett‘s Esophagus Fock KM, Ang TL. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Feb;5(1):123-30. doi: 10.1586/egh.10.82.
  2. 42.Cost Considerations in Implementing a Screening and Surveillance Strategy for Barrett‘s Oesophagus Inadomi JM. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015 Feb;29(1):51-63. doi: 10.1016/j. bpg.2014.12.002. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
  3. 43.Preliminary Feasibility Study Using a Novel Narrow-Band Imaging System with Dual Focus Magnification Capability in Barrett‘s Esophagus: Is the Time Ripe to Abandon Random Biopsies? Singh R, Shahzad MA et al. Dig Endosc. 2013 May;25 Suppl 2:151-6. doi: 10.1111/den.12106.
  4. 44.Carbon Dioxide Insufflation Versus Conventional Air Insufflation for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Published Randomized Controlled Trials Sajid MS, Caswell J et al. Colorectal Dis. 2015 Feb;17(2):111-23. doi: 10.1111/codi.12837.
  1. 1.Update on Endoscopic Tissue Sampling Devices. Technology Assessment Committe et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 May;63(6):741-5.
  2. 2.The Role of Endoscopy in Barrett‘s Esophagus and Other Premalignant Conditions of the Esophagus. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Evans JA et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Dec;76(6):1087-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.08.004.
  3. 3.American Gastroenterological Association Institute Guideline on the Role of Upper Gastrointestinal Biopsy to Evaluate Dyspepsia in the Adult Patient in the Absence of Visible Mucosal Lesions Yang YX, Brill J et al.

    Gastroenterology. 2015 Oct;149(4):1082-7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.07.039. Epub 2015 Aug 14.
  1. 4.The Role of Endoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Standards of Practice Committee et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 May;81(5):1101-21.e1-13. doi: 10.1016/j. ie.2014.10.030. Epub 2015 Mar 20.
  2. 5.The Seattle Protocol Does Not More Reliably Predict the Detection of Cancer at the Time of Esophagectomy Than a Less Intensive Surveillance Protocol Kariv R, Plesec TP et al.

    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jun;7(6):653-8; quiz 606. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2008.11.024. Epub 2008 Dec 13.
  3. 6.Random Biopsies Taken During Colonoscopic Surveillance of Patients with Longstanding Ulcerative Colitis: Low Yield and Absence of Clinical Consequences van den Broek FJ, Stokkers PC et al.

    Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 May;109(5):715-22. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.93. Epub 2011 Mar 22.
  1. 7.Validation of a Simple Classification System for Endoscopic Diagnosis of Small Colorectal Polyps Using Narrow-Band Imaging Hewett DG, Kaltenbach T et al.

    Gastroenterology. 2012 Sep;143(3):599-607.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.05.006. Epub 2012 May 15.
  2. 8.Endoscopic Prediction of Deep Submucosal Invasive Carcinoma: Validation of the Narrow-Band Imaging International Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE) Classification Hayashi N, Tanaka S et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Oct;78(4):625-32. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.04.185. Epub 2013 Jul 30.
  3. 9.Narrow-Band Imaging with Dual Focus Magnification in Differentiating Colorectal Neoplasia Singh R, Jayanna M et al.

    Dig Endosc. 2013 May;25 Suppl 2:16-20. doi: 10.1111/den.12075.
  1. 10.Standard Endoscopy with Random Biopsies Versus Narrow Band Imaging Targeted Biopsies in Barrett‘s Oesophagus: A Prospective, International, Randomised Controlled Trial Sharma P, Hawes RH et al.

    Gut. 2013 Jan;62(1):15-21. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300962. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
  2. 11.Advanced Imaging Technologies Increase Detection of Dysplasia and Neoplasia in Patients with Barrett‘s Esophagus: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review Qumseya BJ, Wang H et al.

    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 Dec;11(12):1562-70.e1-2. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2013.06.017. Epub 2013 Jul 12.
  3. 12.White-Light or Narrow-Band Imaging Colonoscopy in Surveillance of Ulcerative Colitis: A Prospective Multicenter Study Leifeld L, Rogler G et al.

    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Oct;13(10):1776-1781.e1. doi: 10.1016/j. cgh.2015.04.172. Epub 2015 May 5.
  1. 13.Narrow Band Imaging with Magnification Endoscopy for Celiac Disease: Results from a Prospective, Single-Center Study De Luca L, Ricciardiello L et al.

    Diagn Ther Endosc. 2013;2013:580526. doi: 10.1155/2013/580526. Epub 2013 Aug 6.
  2. 14.Adenoma Detection Rate and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Death van den Broek E, Richard W et al.

    N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3;370(14):1298-306
  3. 15.Improving Measurement of the Adenoma Detection Rate and Adenoma Per Colonoscopy Quality Metric: The Indiana University Experience Kahi CJ, Vemulapalli KC et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Mar;79(3):448-54.
  1. 19.High Definition Colonoscopy vs. Standard Video Endoscopy for the Detection of Colonic Polyps: A Meta-Analysis Subramanian V, Mannath J et al.

    Endoscopy. 2011 Jun;43(6):499-505. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1256207. Epub 2011 Feb 28.
  2. 20.Detection of Colorectal Adenoma by Narrow Band Imaging (HQ190) vs. High-Definition White Light Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial Leung WK, Lo OS et al.

    Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jun;109(6):855-63. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.83. Epub 2014 Apr 22.
  3. 21.Next-Generation Narrow Band Imaging System for Colonic Polyp Detection: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Trial Horimatsu T, Sano Y et al.

    Int J Colorectal Dis. 2015 Jul;30(7):947-54. doi: 10.1007/s00384-015-2230-x. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
  1. 22.Narrow Band Imaging to Differentiate Neoplastic and Non-Neoplastic Colorectal Polyps in Real Time: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Operating Characteristics McGill SK, Evangelou E et al.

    Gut. 2013 Dec;62(12):1704-13. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303965. Epub 2013 Jan 7.
  2. 23.Diagnostic Performance of Narrowed Spectrum Endoscopy, Autofluorescence Imaging, and Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for Optical Diagnosis of Colonic Polyps: A Meta-Analysis Wanders LK, East JE et al.

    Lancet Oncol. 2013 Dec;14(13):1337-47. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70509-6. Epub 2013 Nov 13.
  3. 24.ASGE Technology Committee Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Assessing the ASGE PIVI Thresholds for Adopting Real-Time Endoscopic Assessment of the Histology of Diminutive Colorectal Polyps ASGE Technology Committee et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Mar;81(3):502.e1-502.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.12.022. Epub 2015 Jan 16.
  1. 25.Real-Time Optical Diagnosis for Diminutive Colorectal Polyps Using Narrow-Band Imaging: The VALID Randomised Clinical Trial Kaltenbach T, Rastogi A et al.

    Gut. 2015 Oct;64(10):1569-77. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307742. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
  2. 26.Advanced Imaging for Detection and Differentiation of Colorectal Neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline Kamiński MF, Hassan C et al.

    Endoscopy. 2014 May;46(5):435-49. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1365348. Epub 2014 Mar 17.
  3. 27.An Analysis of the Learning Curve to Achieve Competency at Colonoscopy Using the JETS Database Ward ST, Mohammed MA et al.

    Gut. 2014 Nov;63(11):1746-54. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305973. Epub 2014 Jan 27.
  1. 28.Patient Pain During Colonoscopy: An Analysis Using Real-Time Magnetic Endoscope Imaging Shah SG, Brooker JC et al.

    Endoscopy. 2002 Jun;34(6):435-40.
  2. 29.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging Versus Standard Colonoscopy in a Routine Colonoscopy Setting: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Holme Ö, Höie O et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1215-22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.054. Epub 2011 Apr 8.
  3. 30.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging Versus Standard Colonoscopy: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Chen Y, Duan YT et al.

    World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 7;19(41):7197-204. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.7197.
  1. 31.Magnetic Endoscopic Imaging as an Adjuvant to Elective Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Mark-Christensen A et al.

    Endoscopy. 2015 Mar;47(3):251-61. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1390767. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
  2. 32.Does “Responsive Insertion Technology” Improve Practice of Colonoscopy? Results of a Randomized Study Cuesta R, Sola-Vera J et al.

    Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014 Mar;49(3):355-61. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2013.871576. Epub 2014 Jan 13.
  3. 33.Conscious Sedation and Analgesia in Colonoscopy [...] Khajavi M, Emami A et al.

    Anesth Pain Med. 2013 Summer;3(1):208-13. doi: 10.5812/aapm.9653. Epub 2013 Jul 1.
  1. 34.Safety Analysis of Endoscopist-Directed [...] Sieg A; bng-Study-Group et al.

    J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Mar;29(3):517-23.
  2. 35.Position Change During Colonoscope Withdrawal Increases Polyp and Adenoma Detection in the Right but not in the Left Side of the Colon: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Ball AJ, Johal SS et al.

    Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep;82(3):488-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.035. Epub 2015 Apr 22.
  3. 36.Variable Stiffness Colonoscope Versus Regular Adult Colonoscope: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Othman MO, Bradley AG et al.

    Endoscopy. 2009 Jan;41(1):17-24. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1103488. Epub 2009 Jan 21.
  1. 37.[...] Sedation for Colonoscopy with a New Ultrathin or a Standard Endoscope: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study Töx U, Schumacher B et al.

    Endoscopy. 2013 Jun;45(6):439-44. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326270. Epub 2013 Mar 6.
  2. 38.Long-Term Colorectal-Cancer Incidence and Mortality after Lower Endoscopy Nishihara R, Wu K et al.

    N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 19;369(12):1095-105. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1301969
  3. 39.The Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using Faecal Immunochemical Test Versus Colonoscopy Wong MC, Ching JY et al.

    Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 4;5:13568. doi: 10.1038/srep13568.
  1. 40.Trends in Adenoma Detection Rates During the First 10 Years of the German Screening Colonoscopy Program Brenner H, Altenhofen L et al.

    Gastroenterology. 2015 Aug;149(2):356-66.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.012. Epub 2015 Apr 22.
  2. 41.Global Epidemiology of Barrett‘s Esophagus Fock KM, Ang TL.

    Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Feb;5(1):123-30. doi: 10.1586/egh.10.82.
  3. 42.Cost Considerations in Implementing a Screening and Surveillance Strategy for Barrett‘s Oesophagus Inadomi JM.

    Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2015 Feb;29(1):51-63. doi: 10.1016/j. bpg.2014.12.002. Epub 2014 Dec 18.

Contact and Support

What Can We Help You With?

Contact Us

Whether you’re looking for answers, would like to solve a problem, or just need to get in touch, you can contact us right here.

To Contact Form

Event Calendar

Find out more about our certified international medical expert training courses in over 25 reference centers across 13 countries in Europe.

To our Trainings and Events

Media Center

Discover our Media Center for further information about our products and services, such as brochures, documents, images, and videos.

To our Media Center

This site is intended for residents of European Countries, as well as Middle East and Africa only. Approved product indications, registrations, and presentations may differ between countries. For any other country, visit our company's global website at www.olympus-global.com or the company website for your country for information about the availability of our products where you live and to obtain the most current registration details and approved product label.