4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of Endocuff use on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          BACKGROUND

          Endocuff - a plastic device with flexible projections - mounted on the distal tip of the colonoscope, promises improved colonic mucosa inspection.

          AIM

          To elucidate the effect of Endocuff on adenoma detection rate (ADR), advanced ADR (AADR) and mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (MAC).

          METHODS

          Literature searches identified randomized-controlled trials evaluating Endocuff-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) vs conventional colonoscopy (CC) in terms of ADR, AADR and MAC. The effect size on study outcomes was calculated using fixed or random effect model, as appropriate, and it is shown as relative risk (RR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] and mean difference (MD) (95%CI). The rate of device removal in EAC arms was also calculated.

          RESULTS

          We identified nine studies enrolling 6038 patients. All studies included mixed population (screening, surveillance and diagnostic examinations). Seven and two studies evaluated the first and the second-generation device, respectively. EAC was associated with increased ADR compared to CC [RR (95%CI): 1.18 (1.05-1.32); Ι 2 = 71%]; EAC benefits more endoscopists with ADR ≤ 35% compared to those with ADR > 35% [RR (95%CI): 1.37 (1.08-1.74); Ι 2 = 49% vs 1.10 (0.99-1.24); Ι 2 = 71%]. In terms of AADR and MAC, no difference was detected between EAC and CC [RR (95%CI): 1.03 (0.85-1.25); Ι 2 = 15% and MD (95%CI): 0.30 (-0.17-0.78); Ι 2 = 99%]. Subgroup analysis did not show any difference between the two device generations regarding all three endpoints. In EAC arms, the device had to be removed in 3% (95%CI: 2%-5%) of the cases mainly due to tortuous sigmoid or presence of diverticula along it.

          CONCLUSION

          EAC increases ADR compared to CC, especially for endoscopists with lower ADR. On the other hand, no significant effect on AADR and MAC was detected.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Increased Rate of Adenoma Detection Associates With Reduced Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Death.

          The quality of endoscopists' colonoscopy performance is measured by adenoma detection rate (ADR). Although ADR is associated inversely with interval colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer death, the effects of an increasing ADR have not been shown. We investigated whether increasing ADRs from individual endoscopists is associated with reduced risks of interval colorectal cancer and subsequent death.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards for colonoscopy

            Colonoscopy should be delivered by endoscopists performing high quality procedures. The British Society of Gastroenterology, the UK Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy, and the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland have developed quality assurance measures and key performance indicators for the delivery of colonoscopy within the UK. This document sets minimal standards for delivery of procedures along with aspirational targets that all endoscopists should aim for.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Colorectal cancers detected after colonoscopy frequently result from missed lesions.

              Colorectal cancers (CRCs) that are detected in patients who have received colonoscopies (interval cancers) arise from missed lesions, incomplete resections of adenomas, or de novo. We estimated rates of interval cancer from missed lesions. Adenoma miss rates, cancer prevalence among patients with adenoma (based on size), and rates of adenoma-to-cancer transitions were estimated from the literature. We used a model to apply these risk estimates to a hypothetical average-risk population that received screening colonoscopies. We calculated the proportion of individuals with tumors missed at the baseline colonoscopy and tumors that arose from missed adenomas during a 5-year follow-up period. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess robustness. We found that 0.7 per 1000 persons undergoing a screening colonoscopy had a cancer that was missed at the baseline colonoscopy and an additional 1.1 per 1000 subsequently developed cancer from a missed adenoma. Therefore, the expected rate of individuals with CRC, based on missed adenomas, was 1.8 per 1000 persons within 5 years. By using the most conservative assumptions-a low miss rate and low prevalence of cancer in adenomas-0.5 per 1000 persons would have a detectable CRC within 5 years after a screening colonoscopy. In contrast, using the highest reported miss rates and cancer prevalence, CRCs from missed lesions would occur in 3.5 per 1000 screened persons. A significant number of patients undergoing a screening colonoscopy that did not detect cancer actually have a malignant lesion or adenoma that could progress in a short interval. Most interval cancers might reflect missed rather than new lesions. Improving adenoma detection could reduce the rate of interval cancers. Copyright © 2010 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                World J Gastroenterol
                World J. Gastroenterol
                WJG
                World Journal of Gastroenterology
                Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
                1007-9327
                2219-2840
                7 March 2019
                7 March 2019
                : 25
                : 9
                : 1158-1170
                Affiliations
                Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital, Athens 12462, Greece
                Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital, Athens 12462, Greece
                Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital, Athens 12462, Greece
                Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital, Athens 12462, Greece. ispapn@ 123456hotmail.com
                Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, Bologna 40138, Italy
                Endoscopy Unit, Nuovo Regina Margherita Hospital, Rome 00153, Italy
                Author notes

                Author contributions: Triantafyllou K designed research; Gkolfakis P and Tziatzios G performed research; Triantafyllou K contributed new reagents or analytic tools; Triantafyllou K, Gkolfakis P, Tziatzios G and Papanikolaou I analyzed data; Triantafyllou K, Gkolfakis P, Tziatzios G, Papanikolaou I, Fuccio L and Hassan C wrote the paper.

                Corresponding author: Ioannis S Papanikolaou, MD, PhD, Academic Fellow, Assistant Professor, Attending Doctor, Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic Research Institute and Diabetes Center, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, ‘‘Attikon” University General Hospital, 1 Rimini Street, Athens 12462, Greece. ispapn@ 123456hotmail.com

                Telephone: +30-210-5832087 Fax: +30-210-5326454

                Article
                jWJG.v25.i9.pg1158
                10.3748/wjg.v25.i9.1158
                6406188
                30863002
                69cf062e-1162-4516-9616-da23c85e78b8
                ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

                This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.

                History
                : 28 December 2018
                : 8 February 2019
                : 15 February 2019
                Categories
                Meta-Analysis

                adenoma detection rate,colonoscopy,adenoma,detection,endocuff,endocuff-vision

                Comments

                Comment on this article