Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis

Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and id...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology 2018-08, Vol.16 (8), p.1209-1219.e9
Hauptverfasser: Facciorusso, Antonio, Del Prete, Valentina, Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo, Della Valle, Nicola, Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo, Monica, Fabio, Cannizzaro, Renato, Muscatiello, Nicola
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1219.e9
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1209
container_title Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology
container_volume 16
creator Facciorusso, Antonio
Del Prete, Valentina
Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo
Della Valle, Nicola
Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo
Monica, Fabio
Cannizzaro, Renato
Muscatiello, Nicola
description Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices. Overall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence. Based on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1964270107</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1542356517313186</els_id><sourcerecordid>1964270107</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4988fe2b2417df1b40a8490e8eadb7738394dda82f3cab8631a64a5720bab9cd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1u00AUhS1ERUvhAdggL9nYnT97bFhFaUsrFZAQrEfXM9ftBHsmzExSZdsnybPkyXCawJLVPYvvHOl-WfaOkpISWl8sSn3_UDJCZUlpSYh8kZ3RSrBCSipeHjOv6uo0ex3jghDWila-yk5ZSzlnlTzLnuZ-XEKAZNeYX_W91aA3ue_zuR-881H7JeaXNiYY8llKoB9GdCm_xLXVGHdb6_JbpwNCtO4-_w4J4749M-j8CBOXUCfr3cd8ttt-xfTow6_d9gsmKMDBsIk2vslOehgivj3e8-zn9dWP-U1x9-3z7Xx2V2je1qkQbdP0yDomqDQ97QSBRrQEGwTTSckb3gpjoGE919A1NadQC6gkIx10rTb8PPtw2F0G_3uFManRRo3DAA79Kira1oJJQomcUHpAdfAxBuzVMtgRwkZRovbq1UJN6tVevaJUkefO--P8qhvR_Gv8dT0Bnw4ATk-uLQYVtUWn0dgwSVLG2__M_wEyo5gi</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1964270107</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Facciorusso, Antonio ; Del Prete, Valentina ; Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo ; Della Valle, Nicola ; Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo ; Monica, Fabio ; Cannizzaro, Renato ; Muscatiello, Nicola</creator><creatorcontrib>Facciorusso, Antonio ; Del Prete, Valentina ; Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo ; Della Valle, Nicola ; Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo ; Monica, Fabio ; Cannizzaro, Renato ; Muscatiello, Nicola</creatorcontrib><description>Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices. Overall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence. Based on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1542-3565</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-7714</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29133257</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Cap-Assisted ; Colon Cancer ; GRADE ; Tumor</subject><ispartof>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018-08, Vol.16 (8), p.1209-1219.e9</ispartof><rights>2018 AGA Institute</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4988fe2b2417df1b40a8490e8eadb7738394dda82f3cab8631a64a5720bab9cd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4988fe2b2417df1b40a8490e8eadb7738394dda82f3cab8631a64a5720bab9cd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29133257$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Facciorusso, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Prete, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Della Valle, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monica, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannizzaro, Renato</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muscatiello, Nicola</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis</title><title>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</title><addtitle>Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol</addtitle><description>Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices. Overall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence. Based on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists.</description><subject>Cap-Assisted</subject><subject>Colon Cancer</subject><subject>GRADE</subject><subject>Tumor</subject><issn>1542-3565</issn><issn>1542-7714</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1u00AUhS1ERUvhAdggL9nYnT97bFhFaUsrFZAQrEfXM9ftBHsmzExSZdsnybPkyXCawJLVPYvvHOl-WfaOkpISWl8sSn3_UDJCZUlpSYh8kZ3RSrBCSipeHjOv6uo0ex3jghDWila-yk5ZSzlnlTzLnuZ-XEKAZNeYX_W91aA3ue_zuR-881H7JeaXNiYY8llKoB9GdCm_xLXVGHdb6_JbpwNCtO4-_w4J4749M-j8CBOXUCfr3cd8ttt-xfTow6_d9gsmKMDBsIk2vslOehgivj3e8-zn9dWP-U1x9-3z7Xx2V2je1qkQbdP0yDomqDQ97QSBRrQEGwTTSckb3gpjoGE919A1NadQC6gkIx10rTb8PPtw2F0G_3uFManRRo3DAA79Kira1oJJQomcUHpAdfAxBuzVMtgRwkZRovbq1UJN6tVevaJUkefO--P8qhvR_Gv8dT0Bnw4ATk-uLQYVtUWn0dgwSVLG2__M_wEyo5gi</recordid><startdate>201808</startdate><enddate>201808</enddate><creator>Facciorusso, Antonio</creator><creator>Del Prete, Valentina</creator><creator>Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo</creator><creator>Della Valle, Nicola</creator><creator>Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo</creator><creator>Monica, Fabio</creator><creator>Cannizzaro, Renato</creator><creator>Muscatiello, Nicola</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201808</creationdate><title>Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis</title><author>Facciorusso, Antonio ; Del Prete, Valentina ; Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo ; Della Valle, Nicola ; Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo ; Monica, Fabio ; Cannizzaro, Renato ; Muscatiello, Nicola</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4988fe2b2417df1b40a8490e8eadb7738394dda82f3cab8631a64a5720bab9cd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Cap-Assisted</topic><topic>Colon Cancer</topic><topic>GRADE</topic><topic>Tumor</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Facciorusso, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Prete, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Della Valle, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monica, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannizzaro, Renato</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muscatiello, Nicola</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Facciorusso, Antonio</au><au>Del Prete, Valentina</au><au>Buccino, Rosario Vincenzo</au><au>Della Valle, Nicola</au><au>Nacchiero, Maurizio Cosimo</au><au>Monica, Fabio</au><au>Cannizzaro, Renato</au><au>Muscatiello, Nicola</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol</addtitle><date>2018-08</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1209</spage><epage>1219.e9</epage><pages>1209-1219.e9</pages><issn>1542-3565</issn><eissn>1542-7714</eissn><abstract>Several add-on devices have been developed to increase rates of colon adenoma detection (ADR). We assessed their overall and comparative efficacy, and estimated absolute magnitude of benefit through a network meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through March 2017 and identified 25 randomized controlled trials (comprising 16,103 patients) that compared the efficacy of add-on devices (cap; Endocuff; Arc Medical Design Ltd, Leeds, UK, and Endorings; Us Endoscopy, Mentor, OH) with each other or with standard colonoscopy. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes included rate of polyp detection, and rate of and time to cecal intubation. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses, and appraised quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We estimated the magnitude of increase in ADR by low-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 10%) and high-performing endoscopists (baseline ADR, 40%) with use of these devices. Overall, distal attachment devices increased ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (relative risk [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03–1.23; low-quality evidence), with potential absolute increases in ADR to 11.3% for low-performing endoscopists and to 45.2% for high-performing endoscopists. In a comparative evaluation, we found low-quality evidence that Endocuff increases ADR compared with standard colonoscopy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.41), with anticipated increases in ADR to 12% for low-performing endoscopists and to 48% for high-performing endoscopists. We found very low quality evidence to support the use of Endorings (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.86–3.36) or caps (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.96–1.19) vs standard colonoscopy for increasing ADR. The benefit of one distal attachment device over another was uncertain due to very low quality evidence. Based on network meta-analysis, we anticipate only modest improvement in ADRs with use of distal attachment devices, especially in low-performing endoscopists.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>29133257</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1542-3565
ispartof Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018-08, Vol.16 (8), p.1209-1219.e9
issn 1542-3565
1542-7714
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1964270107
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Cap-Assisted
Colon Cancer
GRADE
Tumor
title Comparative Efficacy of Colonoscope Distal Attachment Devices in Increasing Rates of Adenoma Detection: A Network Meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T17%3A40%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Efficacy%20of%20Colonoscope%20Distal%20Attachment%20Devices%C2%A0in%20Increasing%20Rates%20of%20Adenoma%20Detection:%20A%C2%A0Network%C2%A0Meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20gastroenterology%20and%20hepatology&rft.au=Facciorusso,%20Antonio&rft.date=2018-08&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1209&rft.epage=1219.e9&rft.pages=1209-1219.e9&rft.issn=1542-3565&rft.eissn=1542-7714&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1964270107%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1964270107&rft_id=info:pmid/29133257&rft_els_id=S1542356517313186&rfr_iscdi=true