Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

14,000,000

Leading Edge Experts

on the ideXlab platform

Stiffness

The Experts below are selected from a list of 966777 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Stiffness - Free Register to Access Experts & Abstracts

Kjetil Garborg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

Mette Kalager - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

Magnus Loberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

Geir Noraberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

Oyvind Holme - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...

  • gradual Stiffness versus magnetic imaging guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes a randomized noninferiority trial
    United European gastroenterology journal, 2017
    Co-Authors: Kjetil Garborg, Havard Wiig, Audun Hasund, Jon Matre, Geir Noraberg, Magnus Loberg, Oyvind Holme, Mette Kalager
    Abstract:

    BackgroundColonoscopes with gradual Stiffness have recently been developed to enhance cecal intubation.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine if the performance of gradual Stiffness colonoscopes is noninferior to that of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI)-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes.MethodsConsecutive patients were randomized to screening colonoscopy with Fujifilm gradual Stiffness or Olympus MEI-guided variable Stiffness colonoscopes. The primary endpoint was cecal intubation rate (noninferiority limit 5%). Secondary endpoints included cecal intubation time. We estimated absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsWe enrolled 475 patients: 222 randomized to the gradual Stiffness instrument, and 253 to the MEI-guided variable Stiffness instrument. Cecal intubation rate was 91.7% in the gradual Stiffness group versus 95.6% in the variable Stiffness group. The adjusted absolute risk for cecal intubation failure was 4.3% higher in the gradual Stiffness group than in the variable st...