VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, USA.
VA Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, North Hills, California, USA.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Dec;36(12):3268-3277. doi: 10.1111/jgh.15702. Epub 2021 Oct 25.
Sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P) may contribute to interval cancer. In a recent meta-analysis, water exchange (WE) was shown to be superior to Endocuff and cap colonoscopy at adenoma and advanced adenoma detection. The strong positive correlation between adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), and sessile serrated adenoma/polyp detection rate (SSA/PDR) prompted us to hypothesize that WE could significantly improve SSA/PDR compared with Endocuff and cap colonoscopy.
The literature was searched for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported SSA/PDR as an outcome and included the keywords colonoscopy, and water exchange, Endocuff, or cap. We performed traditional network meta-analyses with random effect models comparing SSA/PDR of each method using air insufflation as the control and reported the odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Performances were ranked based on P-score.
A total of 531 articles resulted from initial keywords search. Eleven RCTs were included in the analysis. A total of 7856 patients underwent air insufflation, WE, Endocuff, or cap colonoscopy. WE significantly increased SSA/PDR (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.33-3.13). Endocuff (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.94-1.41) and cap (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.42-2.74) did not significantly impact SSA/P detection. P-scores for WE (0.96), Endocuff (0.49), cap (0.37), and air insufflation (0.17) suggested that WE had the highest SSA/PDR. The results did not change after adjusting for mean withdrawal time and indication for colonoscopy.
Water exchange significantly increases SSA/PDR and is superior to Endocuff and cap colonoscopy at detecting SSA/P.
无蒂锯齿状腺瘤/息肉(SSA/P)可能导致间期癌。在最近的一项荟萃分析中,水交换(WE)在腺瘤和高级别腺瘤检测方面优于 Endocuff 和帽式结肠镜检查。腺瘤检出率(ADR)、高级别腺瘤检出率(AADR)和无蒂锯齿状腺瘤/息肉检出率(SSA/PDR)之间存在很强的正相关关系,这促使我们假设 WE 可以显著提高 SSA/PDR,与 Endocuff 和帽式结肠镜检查相比。
检索了所有以 SSA/PDR 为结局的随机对照试验(RCT)文献,并使用关键词“colonoscopy”和“water exchange”、“Endocuff”或“cap”进行搜索。我们使用随机效应模型进行了传统的网络荟萃分析,比较了每种方法的 SSA/PDR,以空气注入作为对照,并报告了优势比(OR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)。根据 P 评分进行表现排名。
初始关键词搜索共产生了 531 篇文章。11 项 RCT 被纳入分析。共有 7856 名患者接受了空气注入、WE、Endocuff 或帽式结肠镜检查。WE 显著提高了 SSA/PDR(OR 2.04;95% CI 1.33-3.13)。Endocuff(OR 1.15;95% CI 0.94-1.41)和帽式(OR 1.08;95% CI 0.42-2.74)对 SSA/P 的检测没有显著影响。WE(0.96)、Endocuff(0.49)、帽式(0.37)和空气注入(0.17)的 P 评分表明 WE 具有最高的 SSA/PDR。调整结肠镜检查的平均退出时间和适应证后,结果没有改变。
WE 显著提高了 SSA/PDR,在检测 SSA/P 方面优于 Endocuff 和帽式结肠镜检查。