['Although standard colonoscopy is considered the optimal test to detect adenomas, it can have a significant adenoma miss rate. A major contributing factor to high miss rates is the inability to visualize adenomas behind haustral folds and at anatomic flexures.', 'To compare the diagnostic yield of balloon-assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy in the detection of simulated polyps in a colon model.', 'Prospective, cohort study.', 'International gastroenterology meeting.', 'A colon model composed of elastic material, which mimics the flexible structure of haustral folds, allowing for dynamic responses to balloon inflation, with embedded simulated colon polyps (n = 12 silicone "polyps").', 'Fifty gastroenterologists were recruited to identify simulated colon polyps in a colon model, first using standard colonoscopy immediately followed by balloon-assisted colonoscopy.', 'Detection of simulated polyps.', 'The median polyp detection rate for all simulated polyps was significantly higher with balloon-assisted as compared with standard colonoscopy (91.7% vs 45.8%, respectively; P < .0001). The significantly higher simulated polyp detection rate with balloon-assisted versus standard colonoscopy was notable both for non-obscured polyps (100.0% vs 75.0%; P < .0001) and obscured polyps (88.0% vs 25.0%; P < .0001).'] Does a novel balloon colonoscope detect significantly more simulated polyps than a standard colonoscope in a colon model?