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

Objective This meta‐analysis aimed to evaluate whether EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy (EAC) could improve adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with standard colonoscopy (SC). Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published up to Mar...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of digestive diseases 2019-11, Vol.20 (11), p.578-588
Main Authors: Jian, Hai Xu, Feng, Bing Cheng, Zhang, Yan, Qu, Jun Yan, Li, Yue Yue, Zuo, Xiu Li
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adenoma
Adenoma - diagnosis
Cecum
Clinical trials
Colon
Colonoscopy
Colonoscopy - adverse effects
Colonoscopy - methods
Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis
Endocuff
Humans
Intubation
Intubation, Gastrointestinal
Meta-analysis
polyp
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Time Factors
Tumors
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective This meta‐analysis aimed to evaluate whether EndoCuff‐assisted colonoscopy (EAC) could improve adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with standard colonoscopy (SC). Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published up to March 2019. All pure randomized controlled trials comparing ADR between EAC and SC groups were included. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain the odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas continuous data were pooled using a mean difference with 95% CI. Review Manager Version 5.3 was used for data analysis. Results Thirteen randomized controlled trials consisting of 9038 patients (EAC: 4574; SC: 4464) were included. The EAC group showed significant superiority over the SC group in ADR (odds ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.15–1.62). However, there were no differences between the EAC and SC groups in adverse events, cecal intubation rate, and cecal intubation time. Conclusions EAC could significantly improve ADR without increasing adverse events, especially for operators with low ADRs. In addition, no significant difference was observed in cecal intubation time and cecal intubation rate between EAC and SC.
ISSN:1751-2972
1751-2980
DOI:10.1111/1751-2980.12814