Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis

医学 结肠镜检查 荟萃分析 随机对照试验 泻药 梅德林 腺瘤 相对风险 置信区间 内科学 外科 结直肠癌 癌症 政治学 法学
作者
Antonio Facciorusso,Valentina Del Prete,Rosario Vincenzo Buccino,Nicola Della Valle,Maurizio Cosimo Nacchiero,Fabio Monica,Renato Cannizzaro,Nicola Muscatiello
出处
期刊:Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:16 (8): 1209-1219.e9 被引量:64
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007
摘要

Background & AimsSeveral add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices.ResultsOverall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence.ConclusionsBased on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists. Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices. Overall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence. Based on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
SciGPT的应助被kk采纳,获得10
刚刚
香蕉觅云的应助被kk采纳,获得10
刚刚
jiajiajiajia发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
乐乐的应助被坚果采纳,获得10
1秒前
l1暮河关注了科研通微信公众号
1秒前
2秒前
ff发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
小蘑菇的应助被T1aNer299采纳,获得10
2秒前
2秒前
3秒前
科研通AI6.2的应助被海笑采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
4秒前
4秒前
渡人舟的应助被独特的香魔采纳,获得10
4秒前
喵斯发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
路宝发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
英俊的铭的应助被大方采纳,获得10
4秒前
Sea_U的应助被奶龙王采纳,获得10
5秒前
6秒前
无语的臻发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
可爱的函函的应助被李秀胜采纳,获得10
6秒前
允许一切发生完成签到,获得积分20
7秒前
zyy0226发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
传奇3的应助被小乐采纳,获得10
8秒前
清爽老九发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
lhh发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
活力灯泡完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
小张发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
9秒前
10秒前
10秒前
hxy发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
旋转木马828完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
ZYY发布了新的文献求助20
11秒前
Liusong完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
你好发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
digfe关注了科研通微信公众号
13秒前
lhh完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Energie-Contracting 1500
Représentation chimique de la structure des kérogènes et des asphaltènes en fonction de leur origine et de leur degré d'évolution 1000
Klimaschutzrecht durch den Energiesektor im Mehrebenensystem – Ein Rechtsvergleich 1000
Oncology Clinical Trials: Successful Design, Conduct, and Analysis, Second Edition 800
Ecotourism 400
Comprehensive Heterocyclic Chemistry IV 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 计算机科学 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 物理 复合材料 内科学 催化作用 光电子学 人工智能 细胞生物学 无机化学 物理化学 数学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 8062195
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9486249
关于积分的说明 21334453
捐赠科研通 7630527
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3396665
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2527019
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2434562