scholarly journals Diagnostic application of water exchange colonoscopy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 515-527
Author(s):  
Xiufang Xu ◽  
Dongqiong Ni ◽  
Yuping Lu ◽  
Xuan Huang
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Water Exchange ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation Rate

Background Few well-designed studies have investigated water exchange colonoscopy (WE). We performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the clinical utility of WE based on high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to compare the impacts of WE, water immersion colonoscopy (WI), and gas-insufflation colonoscopy. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Elsevier, CNKI, VIP, and Wan Fang Data for RCTs on WE. We analyzed the results using fixed- or random-effect models according to the presence of heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Results Thirteen studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. The colonoscopic techniques included WE as the study group, and WI and air- or CO2-insufflation colonoscopy as control groups. WE was significantly superior to the control procedures in terms of adenoma detection rate, proportion of painless unsedated colonoscopy procedures, and cecal intubation rate according to odds ratios. WE was also significantly better in terms of maximal pain score and patient satisfaction score according to mean difference. Conclusions WE can remarkably improve the adenoma detection rate, proportion of painless unsedated colonoscopy procedures, patient satisfaction, and cecal intubation rate, as well as reducing the maximal pain score in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

scholarly journals Cap-assisted colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 06 (10) ◽  
pp. E1214-E1223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkat Nutalapati ◽  
Vijay Kanakadandi ◽  
Madhav Desai ◽  
Mojtaba Olyaee ◽  
Amit Rastogi
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intubation Time ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation Time ◽  
Cecal Intubation Rate ◽  
Standard Colonoscopy

Abstract Background and study aims Standard colonoscopy (SC) is the preferred modality for screening for colon cancer; however, it carries a significant polyp/adenoma miss rate. Cap-assisted colonoscopy (CC) has been shown to improve polyp/adenoma detection rate, decrease cecal intubation time and increase cecal intubation rate when compared to standard colonoscopy (SC). However, data on adenoma detection rate (ADR) are conflicting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the performance of CC with SC for ADR among high-quality randomized controlled trials. Patients and methods We performed an extensive literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science databases and abstracts published at national meetings. Only comparative studies between CC and SC were included if they reported ADR, adenoma per person (APP), cecal intubation rate, and cecal intubation time. The exclusion criterion for comparing ADR was studies with Jadad score ≤ 2. The odds ratio (OR) was calculated using Mantel-Haenszel method. I2 test was used to measure heterogeneity among studies. Results Analysis of high-quality studies (Jadad score ≥ 3, total of 7 studies) showed that use of cap improved the ADR with the results being statistically significant (OR 1.18, 95 % CI 1.03 – 1.33) and detection of 0.16 (0.02 – 0.30) additional APP. The cecal intubation rate in the CC group was 96.3 % compared to 94.5 % with SC (total of 17 studies). Use of cap improved cecal intubation (OR 1.61, 95 % CI 1.33 – 1.95) when compared to SC (P value < 0.001). Use of cap decreased cecal intubation time by an average of 0.88 minutes (95 % CI 0.37 – 1.39) or 53 seconds. Conclusions Meta-analysis of high-quality studies showed that CC improved the ADR compared to SC.

scholarly journals Endocuff-assisted versus Cap-assisted Colonoscopy in Increasing Adenoma Detection Rate. A Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Facciorusso ◽  
Vincenzo R Buccino ◽  
Rodolfo Sacco
Keyword(s):  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
Sessile Serrated Adenoma ◽  
Serrated Adenoma ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation Rate

Background and Aims: Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection. We aimed to compare the endocuff-assisted colonoscopy with cap-assisted colonoscopy through a pairwise meta-analysis of randomized trials. Methods: We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2020 and identified 6 randomized controlled trials (comprising 2,027 patients). The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate; secondary outcomes included sessile serrated adenoma detection rate, mean adenoma per colonoscopy, cecal intubation rate and time to reach cecum. Safety data were also analyzed. We performed pairwise meta-analysis through a random effects model and expressed data as risk ratio and 95% confidence interval. Results: Overall, pooled adenoma detection rate was 48.1% (39.3-56.8%) with endocuff and 40.5% (30.4- 50.6%; risk ratio 1.14, 0.96-1.35) with cap. Proximal adenoma detection rate was 45.7% (36.8-54.7%) and 24% (17-45.1%) with endocuff and cap, respectively (risk ratio 2.04, 0.93-4.49), whereas endocuff outperformed cap-assisted colonoscopy in detecting diminutive (≤ 5 mm) adenomas (risk ratio 2.74, 1.53-4.90) and in terms of mean adenoma per colonoscopy (mean difference 0.31, 0.05 -0.57; p=0.02). Sessile serrated adenoma detection rate (risk ratio 1.36, 0.72-2.59), cecal intubation rate (risk ratio 0.99, 0.98-1.00), and time to reach cecum (6.87 min versus 6.87 min) were similar between the two groups. No serious adverse event was observed. Conclusion: Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy seems to provide a higher adenoma detection rate as compared to cap-assisted colonoscopy, in particular concerning smaller diminutive polyps.

scholarly journals Real-time computer aided colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for improving adenoma detection rate: A meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 29-30 ◽  
pp. 100622
Author(s):  
Babu P. Mohan ◽  
Antonio Facciorusso ◽  
Shahab R. Khan ◽  
Saurabh Chandan ◽  
Lena L. Kassab ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
Standard Colonoscopy

Tu1042 Cecal Intubation Rate Correlates With Adenoma Detection Rate But Has No Impact on Advanced Adenoma Detection Rate

2016 ◽  
Vol 83 (5) ◽  
pp. AB541
Author(s):  
Daniela Sallinger ◽  
Elisabeth Waldmann ◽  
Monika Ferlitsch ◽  
Michael H. Trauner ◽  
Martha Britto-Arias ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Advanced Adenoma ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation Rate

scholarly journals Nurse Participation in Colonoscopy Observation versus the Colonoscopist Alone for Polyp and Adenoma Detection: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Controlled Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Xu ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
Haojun Song ◽  
Weihong Wang ◽  
Sijie Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Significant Difference

The role of nurse participation (NP) in colonoscopy observation for polyp and adenoma detection is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether nurse participation can improve polyp and adenoma detection.Patients and Methods. The PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English. The outcome measurements included (1) the polyp and adenoma detection rate (PDR and ADR); (2) the advanced lesions detection rate; and (3) the mean polyp and adenoma detection rate per colonoscopy.Results. Three RCTs with a total of 1676 patients were included. The pooled data showed a significantly higher ADR in the NP group than colonoscopist alone (CA) (45.7% versus 39.3%; RR 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04–1.30). And it showed no significant difference in the PDR and advanced lesions detection rate between the two groups (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.95–1.37; RR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.91–2.00; resp.).Conclusions. Nurse participation during a colonoscopy can improve the ADR, whereas no benefit for the PDR and advanced lesions detection rate was observed. All RCTs included in the meta-analysis had high risk of bias. Thus, there is a need for new research that uses sound methodology to definitively address the research question under study.

EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy could improve adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 578-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hai Xu Jian ◽  
Bing Cheng Feng ◽  
Yan Zhang ◽  
Jun Yan Qu ◽  
Yue Yue Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection

Multimedia based education on bowel preparation improves adenoma detection rate: Systematic review & meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saurabh Chandan ◽  
Sumant Arora ◽  
Babu P. Mohan ◽  
Shahab R. Khan ◽  
Ojasvini C. Chandan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adenoma Detection

Adenoma detection rate and cecal intubation rate: Quality indicators for colonoscopy

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Lourdes Ruiz-Rebollo ◽  
Noelia Alcaide-Suárez ◽  
Beatriz Burgueño-Gómez ◽  
Beatriz Antolin-Melero ◽  
M.ª Fe Muñoz-Moreno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rate ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
Cecal Intubation ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Cecal Intubation Rate
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document