4.4 Review

Increased Sessile Serrated Adenoma Detection Rate With Mechanical New Technology Devices A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 4, Pages 335-342

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001363

Keywords

sessile serrated adenoma; colon cancer; colonoscopy; detection

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of currently available mechanical new technology devices and conventional colonoscopy in detecting sessile-serrated adenomas. The results showed that mechanical NTDs, particularly Endocuff, significantly increased the SSADR.
Goal: This meta-analysis aims to compare the sessile-serrated adenoma detection rate (SSADR) of currently available mechanical new technology devices (NTDs) to conventional colonoscopy (CC). Background: NTDs including Endocuff, EndoRing, G-Eye, and AmplifEYE were developed with the aim of improving adenoma detection rate by enhancing colonic mucosal visualization. Increasing awareness of the risk of sessile-serrated adenoma progression to malignancy has ushered a need to increase the detection of these characteristically flat lesions. Study: Embase and PubMed/Medline databases were searched from inception through January 2019 for published manuscripts or major conference abstracts reporting SSADR with Endocuff, EndoRing, G-Eye, AmplifEYE, and CC. Randomized controlled trials, high-quality case-control, cohort, and observational studies in adults with >10 subjects were included. The primary outcome was pooled SSADR odds ratio (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) comparing CC with the NTDs. In addition, an analysis comparing each device to CC was performed. Results: Of 207 citations identified, a total of 14 studies with 12,655 subjects were included in our analysis (5931 subjects with NTDs and 6724 with CC). There were 12 studies with Endocuff, 2 with EndoRing, 1 with G-EYE, and 1 with AmplifEYE. The mean age was 62.4 years and 57.5% were males. Pooled SSADR with NTDs was 12.3% as compared with 6.4% with CC, with an OR of 1.81 (95% CI: 1.6-2.0, I (2): 77%). Analysis of Endocuff alone yielded an OR 1.81 (95% CI: 1.6-2.1, I (2): 79%). Conclusion: Mechanical NTDs, notably Endocuff, are a safe and effective tool to increase the SSADR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available