Suppr超能文献

染色内镜检查与传统内镜检查在结肠和直肠息肉检测中的比较。

Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum.

作者信息

Brown Steven R, Baraza Wal, Din Said, Riley Stuart

机构信息

Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Dept Surgery, Northern General Hospital, Herried Road, Sheffield S7, South Yorkshire, UK, S5 7AU.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 7;4(4):CD006439. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006439.pub4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although conventional colonoscopy is the most accurate test available for the investigation of the colorectum for polyps, data exist that raise concerns about its sensitivity. Chromoscopy (spraying dye onto the surface of the colon to make polyps more visible) may be one way of enhancing the ability of colonoscopy to detect polyps, particularly diminutive flat lesions, which otherwise may be difficult to detect.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the use of chromoscopy enhances the detection of polyps and neoplasia during endoscopic examination of the colon and rectum.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (October 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library; Issue 10, 2015), MEDLINE (January 1950 to October 2015), EMBASE (January 1974 to October 2015), and ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (both November 2015). We also handsearched abstracts from relevant meetings from 1980 to 2015. Search terms included 'randomised trials' containing combinations of the following: 'chromoscopy' 'colonoscopy' 'dye-spray' 'chromo-endoscopy' 'indigo-carmine' 'magnifying endoscopy'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all prospective randomised trials comparing chromoscopic with conventional endoscopic examination of the whole of the colon and rectum. We excluded studies of people with inflammatory bowel disease or polyposis syndromes and any studies that combined chromoscopy with additional interventions (cap assistance, water-perfused, etc.).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials, and two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. Outcome measures included the detection of polyps (neoplastic and non-neoplastic), the detection of diminutive lesions, the number of participants with multiple neoplastic lesions, and the extubation time.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (2727 participants) in this update. Five trials were of sufficiently similar design to allow for pooled results. Two trials differed substantially in design and were included in a subgroup analysis. All the trials had some methodological drawbacks. However, combining the results showed a significant difference in favour of chromoscopy for all detection outcomes. In particular, chromoscopy was likely to yield significantly more people with at least one neoplastic lesion (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31 to 1.79; 7 trials; 2727 participants), and at least one diminutive neoplastic lesion (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.92; 4 trials; 1757 participants). Significantly more people with three or more neoplastic lesions were also detected, but only when studies that used high-definition colonoscopy in the control group were excluded (OR 4.63, 95% CI 1.99 to 10.80; 2 trials; 519 participants). None of the included studies reported any adverse events related to the use of the contrast dye.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that chromoscopy enhances the detection of neoplasia in the colon and rectum. People with neoplastic polyps, particularly those with multiple polyps, are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. Such lesions, which presumably would be missed with conventional colonoscopy, could contribute to the interval cancer numbers on any surveillance programme.

摘要

背景

尽管传统结肠镜检查是目前用于检查结直肠息肉最准确的方法,但已有数据引发了对其敏感性的担忧。染色检查(将染料喷洒在结肠表面以使息肉更易可见)可能是增强结肠镜检查检测息肉能力的一种方法,尤其是微小扁平病变,否则这些病变可能难以检测到。

目的

确定染色检查在结肠镜和直肠镜检查期间是否能增强对息肉和肿瘤的检测。

检索方法

我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane结直肠癌专业注册库(2015年10月)、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)(Cochrane图书馆;2015年第10期)、MEDLINE(1950年1月至2015年10月)、EMBASE(1974年1月至2015年10月)、ClinicalTrials.gov和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(均为2015年11月)。我们还手工检索了1980年至2015年相关会议的摘要。检索词包括包含以下组合的“随机试验”:“染色检查”“结肠镜检查”“染料喷洒”“色素内镜检查”“靛胭脂”“放大内镜检查”。

选择标准

我们纳入了所有比较染色检查与传统全结肠镜和直肠镜检查的前瞻性随机试验。我们排除了炎症性肠病或息肉病综合征患者的研究以及任何将染色检查与其他干预措施(如帽辅助、水灌注等)相结合的研究。

数据收集与分析

两名综述作者独立评估潜在合格试验的方法学质量,两名综述作者独立从纳入试验中提取数据。结局指标包括息肉(肿瘤性和非肿瘤性)的检测、微小病变的检测、有多个肿瘤性病变的参与者数量以及拔管时间。

主要结果

本次更新纳入了7项试验(2727名参与者)。5项试验设计足够相似,可进行汇总分析。2项试验设计差异较大,纳入亚组分析。所有试验都存在一些方法学缺陷。然而,综合结果显示,在所有检测结局方面,染色检查均有显著差异,支持染色检查。特别是,染色检查可能使至少有一个肿瘤性病变的人数显著增加(比值比(OR)1.53,95%置信区间(CI)1.31至1.79;7项试验;2727名参与者),以及至少有一个微小肿瘤性病变的人数显著增加(OR 1.51,95%CI 1.19至1.92;4项试验;1757名参与者)。也检测到有三个或更多肿瘤性病变的人数显著增加,但仅排除对照组使用高清结肠镜检查的研究时(OR 4.63,95%CI 1.99至10.80;2项试验;519名参与者)。纳入的研究均未报告与使用对比染料相关的任何不良事件。

作者结论

有强有力的证据表明,染色检查可增强对结肠和直肠肿瘤的检测。患有肿瘤性息肉的人,尤其是那些有多个息肉的人,患结直肠癌的风险增加。这些病变可能会被传统结肠镜检查遗漏,可能会导致任何监测计划中的间期癌数量增加。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验