Suppr超能文献

系统荟萃分析:采用伞状荟萃分析评估结肠胶囊内镜对结肠肿瘤的诊断准确性

Systematic meta-review: diagnostic accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy for colonic neoplasia with umbrella meta-analysis.

作者信息

Lei Ian Io, Cortegoso Valdivia Pablo, Marlicz Wojciech, Skonieczna-Żydecka Karolina, Arasaradnam Ramesh, Eliakim Rami, Koulaouzidis Anastasios

机构信息

Institute of Precision Diagnostics & Translational Medicine, University Hospital of Coventry and Warwickshire, Clifford Bridge Rd, Coventry CV2 2DX, UK.

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

出版信息

Ther Adv Gastrointest Endosc. 2025 Aug 30;18:26317745251370845. doi: 10.1177/26317745251370845. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is rising globally, intensifying pressure on endoscopy services. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) offers a non-invasive alternative. Despite several systematic reviews showing reasonable polyp detection rates, clinical scepticism remains.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-review and umbrella meta-analysis aim to synthesise evidence on CCE's diagnostic accuracy in polyp and CRC detection, using CT colonography or colonoscopy as the reference standard.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed for systematic reviews evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CCE in detecting polyps and CRC. A qualitative thematic review and synthesis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A bivariate generalised linear mixed model with random effects was used for pooled diagnostic accuracy estimates, and meta-regression was performed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation.

RESULTS

Nine systematic reviews encompassing 28 unique studies (3472 participants) were included. For polyps of any size, the pooled per-patient sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.69-0.86), specificity was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.81. For polyps ⩾6 mm, sensitivity and specificity were 0.80 and 0.87 (AUC 0.81), and for polyps ⩾10 mm, 0.88 and 0.95 (AUC 0.95), respectively. Second-generation CCE (CCE2) improved diagnostic accuracy across all polyp sizes. For polyps of any size, CCE2 achieved a sensitivity of 0.90, specificity of 0.81 and AUC of 0.82. For polyps ⩾ 6 mm and ⩾10 mm, AUCs were 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. CCE2 showed high sensitivity for detecting any polyp size and polyps ⩾6 mm, with low heterogeneity ( > 0.05,  < 25%). CRC detection sensitivity was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.73-1.00) after excluding cases where the capsule failed to reach the rectum due to battery exhaustion.

CONCLUSION

CCE2 has high diagnostic accuracy for polyps and colorectal cancer detection. While technical challenges persist, CCE2 shows promise as a complementary diagnostic tool to help address the increasing demands for endoscopy services.

摘要

背景

全球结直肠癌(CRC)发病率不断上升,给内镜检查服务带来了更大压力。结肠胶囊内镜检查(CCE)提供了一种非侵入性的替代方法。尽管多项系统评价显示息肉检出率合理,但临床仍持怀疑态度。

目的

本荟萃综述和伞状荟萃分析旨在综合以CT结肠成像或结肠镜检查为参考标准时,CCE在息肉和CRC检测中诊断准确性的证据。

方法

我们对EMBASE、MEDLINE和PubMed进行了系统检索,以查找评估CCE检测息肉和CRC诊断准确性的系统评价。按照PRISMA指南进行了定性主题综述和综合分析。使用具有随机效应的双变量广义线性混合模型进行汇总诊断准确性估计,并使用限制最大似然估计进行荟萃回归。

结果

纳入了9项系统评价,包括28项独特研究(3472名参与者)。对于任何大小的息肉,汇总的患者水平敏感性为0.79(95%CI:0.69 - 0.86),特异性为0.77(95%CI:0.71 - 0.82),曲线下面积(AUC)为0.81。对于≥6 mm的息肉,敏感性和特异性分别为0.80和0.87(AUC 0.81),对于≥10 mm的息肉,分别为0.88和0.95(AUC 0.95)。第二代CCE(CCE2)在所有息肉大小中均提高了诊断准确性。对于任何大小的息肉,CCE2的敏感性为0.90,特异性为0.81,AUC为0.82。对于≥6 mm和≥10 mm的息肉,AUC分别为0.92和0.94。CCE2对任何大小的息肉和≥6 mm的息肉检测显示出高敏感性,异质性低(I² > 0.05,τ² < 25%)。排除因电池耗尽导致胶囊未到达直肠的病例后,CRC检测敏感性为0.96(95%CI:0.73 - 1.00)。

结论

CCE2在息肉和结直肠癌检测中具有较高的诊断准确性。虽然技术挑战仍然存在,但CCE2有望作为一种辅助诊断工具,帮助应对内镜检查服务不断增长的需求。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/16ed/12398663/37dec02d45e8/10.1177_26317745251370845-fig1.jpg

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