Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Li, Ai
• Yang, Jing‐Ze
• Yang, Xiao‐Xiao
• Feng, Bing‐Cheng
• Zhang, Ming‐Ming
• Qu, Jun‐Yan
• Zhou, Ru‐Chen
• Wang, Peng
• Li, Li‐Xiang
• Zuo, Xiu‐Li
• Li, Yan‐Qing

Titel

Endocuff‐assisted colonoscopy versus cap‐assisted colonoscopy for adenoma detection rate: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Ist Teil von

• Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2020-12, Vol.35 (12), p.2066-2073

Ort / Verlag

Australia: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2020

Quelle

Wiley Online Library

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Background and Aims Add‐on devices have been widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to compare the adenoma detection rate between Endocuff‐assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and cap‐assisted colonoscopy (CAC). Methods PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases were searched. Outcomes included adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, and withdrawal time. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain the odds ratio or risk ratio. Continuous data were pooled using the mean difference. Results Of the 240 articles reviewed, six randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 1994 patients. In the meta‐analysis, no statistical difference in adenoma detection rate was detected between EAC and CAC (47.0% vs 45.1%; P = 0.33). EAC significantly improved detection rate of diminutive adenomas/polyps compared with CAC (P = 0.01). Cecal intubation was achieved in 96.5% in EAC group and 97.9% in CAC group (P = 0.04). Besides, no statistical difference was found in cecal intubation time (P = 0.86), withdrawal time (P = 0.88), small adenomas/polyps (P = 0.60), or large adenomas/polyps (P = 0.95). Conclusion EAC and CAC have their respective merits. EAC significantly improve the detection of diminutive adenomas/polyps. CAC was better in cecal intubation rate.