共 50 条
Relative Efficacies of Interventions to Improve the Quality of Screening-Related Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
被引:5
作者:
Khan, Rishad
[1
]
Ruan, Yibing
[2
,3
,5
]
Yuan, Yuhong
[4
,5
]
Khalaf, Kareem
[1
]
Sabrie, Nasruddin S.
[1
]
Gimpaya, Nikko
[1
]
Scaffidi, Michael A.
[1
,6
]
Bansal, Rishi
[1
]
Vaska, Marcus
[7
]
Brenner, Darren R.
[3
,8
]
Hilsden, Robert J.
[2
,8
,9
]
Heitman, Steven J.
[8
,9
]
Leontiadis, Grigorios I.
[2
,3
]
Grover, Samir C.
[1
,10
]
Forbes, Nauzer
[8
,9
]
机构:
[1] Univ Toronto, St Michaels Hosp, Div Gastroenterol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Calgary, Cumming Sch Med, Dept Oncol, Calgary, AB, Canada
[3] Alberta Hlth Serv, Dept Canc Epidemiol & Prevent Res, Canc Control Alberta, Calgary, AB, Canada
[4] McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Div Gastroenterol, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, Farncombe Family Digest Hlth Res Inst, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[6] Queens Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Kingston, ON, Canada
[7] Alberta Hlth Serv, Knowledge Resource Serv, Calgary, AB, Canada
[8] Univ Calgary, Dept Community Hlth Sci, Calgary, AB, Canada
[9] Univ Calgary, Dept Med, Div Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Calgary, AB, Canada
[10] Univ Toronto, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Inst, Dept Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词:
Colonoscopy;
Screening;
Adenoma;
Colorectal Cancer;
ADENOMA DETECTION RATE;
COLORECTAL-CANCER;
RISK-FACTORS;
ASSOCIATION;
INDICATORS;
D O I:
10.1053/j.gastro.2024.03.018
中图分类号:
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号:
摘要:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Significant fi cant variability exists in colonoscopy quality indicators, including adenoma detection rate (ADR). We synthesized evidence from randomized trials in a network meta-analysis on interventions to improve colonoscopy quality. METHODS: We included trials from database inceptions to September 25, 2023, of patients undergoing screening-related colonoscopy and presented efficacies fi cacies of interventions within domains (periprocedural parameters, endoscopist-directed interventions, intraprocedural techniques, endoscopic technologies, distal attachment devices, and additive substances) compared to standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR. We used a Bayesian random-effects model using Markov-chain Monte Carlo simulation, with 10,000 burn-ins and 100,000 iterations. We calculated odds ratios with 95% credible intervals and present surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves. RESULTS: We included 124 trials evaluating 37 interventions for the primary outcome. Nine interventions resulted in statistically significant fi cant improvements in ADR compared to standard colonoscopy (9-minute withdrawal time, dual observation, water exchange, i-SCAN [Pentax Ltd], linked color imaging, computer-aided detection, Endocuff [Olympus Corp], Endocuff Vision [Olympus Corp], and oral methylene blue). Dual observation (SUCRA, 0.84) and water exchange (SUCRA, 0.78) ranked highest among intraprocedural techniques; i-SCAN (SUCRA, 0.95), linked color imaging (SUCRA, 0.85), and computer-aided detection (SUCRA, 0.78) among endoscopic technologies; WingCap (A&A Medical Supply LLC) (SUCRA, 0.87) and Endocuff (SUCRA, 0.85) among distal attachment devices and oral methylene blue (SUCRA, 0.94) among additive substances. No interventions improved detection of advanced adenomas, and only narrow- band imaging improved detection of serrated lesions (odds ratio, 2.94; 95% credible interval, 1.46-6.25). - 6.25). CONCLUSIONS: Several interventions are effective in improving adenoma detection and overall colonoscopy quality, many of which are cost-free. These results can inform endoscopists, unit managers, and endoscopy societies on relative efficacies. i cacies.
引用
收藏
页码:560 / 590
页数:31
相关论文