Effect of Endocuff use on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Konstantinos Triantafyllou [1 ]
Paraskevas Gkolfakis [1 ]
Georgios Tziatzios [1 ]
Ioannis S Papanikolaou [1 ]
Lorenzo Fuccio [2 ]
Cesare Hassan [3 ]
机构
[1] Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital
[2] Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital
[3] Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital
关键词
Adenoma detection rate; Colonoscopy; Adenoma; Detection; Endocuff; Endocuff-Vision;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R735.35 [];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND Endocuff-a plastic device with flexible projections-mounted on the distal tip of the colonoscope, promises improved colonic mucosa inspection.AIM To elucidate the effect of Endocuff on adenoma detection rate(ADR), advanced ADR(AADR) and mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy(MAC).METHODS Literature searches identified randomized-controlled trials evaluating Endocuffassisted colonoscopy(EAC) vs conventional colonoscopy(CC) in terms of ADR,AADR and MAC. The effect size on study outcomes was calculated using fixed or random effect model, as appropriate, and it is shown as relative risk(RR) [95%confidence interval(CI)] and mean difference(MD)(95%CI). The rate of device removal in EAC arms was also calculated.RESULTS We identified nine studies enrolling 6038 patients. All studies included mixed population(screening, surveillance and diagnostic examinations). Seven and two studies evaluated the first and the second-generation device, respectively. EAC was associated with increased ADR compared to CC [RR(95%CI): 1.18(1.05-1.32); Ι2= 71%]; EAC benefits more endoscopists with ADR ≤ 35% compared to those with ADR > 35% [RR(95%CI): 1.37(1.08-1.74); Ι2= 49% vs 1.10(0.99-1.24); Ι2= 71%]. In terms of AADR and MAC, no difference was detected between EAC and CC [RR(95%CI): 1.03(0.85-1.25); Ι2= 15% and MD(95%CI): 0.30(-0.17-0.78);Ι2= 99%]. Subgroup analysis did not show any difference between the two device generations regarding all three endpoints. In EAC arms, the device had to be removed in 3%(95%CI: 2%-5%) of the cases mainly due to tortuous sigmoid or presence of diverticula along it.CONCLUSION EAC increases ADR compared to CC, especially for endoscopists with lower ADR. On the other hand, no significant effect on AADR and MAC was detected.
引用
收藏
页码:1158 / 1170
页数:13
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   Colonoscopy attachments for the detection of precancerous lesions during colonoscopy: A review of the literature [J].
Paraskevas Gkolfakis ;
Georgios Tziatzios ;
Eleftherios Spartalis ;
Ioannis S Papanikolaou ;
Konstantinos Triantafyllou .
World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2018, (37) :30-40
[2]   Use of the Endocuff during routine colonoscopy examination improves adenoma detection: A meta-analysis [J].
Matthew Chin ;
William Karnes ;
M Mazen Jamal ;
John G Lee ;
Robert Lee ;
Jason Samarasena ;
Matthew L Bechtold ;
Douglas L Nguyen .
World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2016, (43) :9642-9649
[3]  
Intensive post‐polypectomy surveillance: Too much for too little?[J] . Cesare Hassan,Alessandro Repici.Digestive Endoscopy . 2019 (1)
[4]  
Cap cuff–assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy for adenoma detection: a randomized back-to-back study[J] . Giovanni D. De Palma,Mariano C. Giglio,Dario Bruzzese,Nicola Gennarelli,Francesco Maione,Saverio Siciliano,Benedetta Manzo,Gianluca Cassese,Gaetano Luglio.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy . 2018 (1)
[5]   Increased Rate of Adenoma Detection Associates With Reduced Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Death [J].
Kaminski, Michal F. ;
Wieszczy, Paulina ;
Rupinski, Maciej ;
Wojciechowska, Urszula ;
Didkowska, Joanna ;
Kraszewska, Ewa ;
Kobiela, Jaroslaw ;
Franczyk, Robert ;
Rupinska, Maria ;
Kocot, Bartlomiej ;
Chaber-Ciopinska, Anna ;
Pachlewski, Jacek ;
Polkowski, Marcin ;
Regula, Jaroslaw .
GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2017, 153 (01) :98-105
[6]  
Adenoma detection with Endocuff colonoscopy versus conventional colonoscopy: a multicentre randomised controlled trial[J] . SC van Doorn,M van der Vlugt,ACTM Depla,CA Wientjes,RC Mallant-Hent,PD Siersema,KMAJ Tytgat,H Tuynman,SD Kuiken,GMP Houben,PCF Stokkers,LMG Moons,PMM Bossuyt,P Fockens,MW Mundt,E Dekker.Gut . 2017 (3)
[7]  
Novel Endocuff-assisted Colonoscopy Significantly Increases the Polyp Detection Rate: A Randomized Controlled Trial[J] . Erwin Biecker,Martin Floer,Achim Heinecke,Philipp Str?bel,Rita B?hme,Michael Schepke,Tobias Meister.Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology . 2015 (5)
[8]  
A grading scale to evaluate colon cleansing for the PillCam COLON capsule: a reliability study[J] . J. Leighton,D. Rex.Endoscopy . 2011 (02)
[9]   Colorectal Cancers Detected After Colonoscopy Frequently Result From Missed Lesions [J].
Pohl, Heiko ;
Robertson, Douglas J. .
CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2010, 8 (10) :858-864
[10]  
The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research[J] . Edwin J. Lai,Audrey H. Calderwood,Gheorghe Doros,Oren K. Fix,Brian C. Jacobson.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy . 2009 (3)