Literature DB >> 21360420

High definition colonoscopy vs. standard video endoscopy for the detection of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis.

V Subramanian1, J Mannath, C J Hawkey, K Ragunath.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: High definition colonoscopy may improve adenoma detection rates but studies report conflicting results. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic yield of colonic polyps between high definition colonoscopy and standard video endoscopy (SVE).
METHODS: Various electronic databases were searched for articles reporting on high definition colonoscopy. The pooled incremental yield and pooled weighted mean difference of high definition colonoscopy over SVE for polyp detection was determined.
RESULTS: Five studies involving 4422 patients provided data on the total number of polyps detected. The incremental yield of high definition colonoscopy for the detection of any polyp was 3.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1 % - 6.7 %) with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 26. For the detection of adenomatous polyps the incremental yield was 3.5 % (95 %CI 0.9 % - 6.1 %) with an NNT of 28. There were no differences between high definition and SVE in the detection of high risk adenomas, with an incremental yield of -0.1 % (95 %CI -1.7 % to 1.6 %). When grouped according to the overall adenoma detection rate of the studies (> 50 % or < 50 %) the pooled weighted mean difference in small adenoma detection was better with high definition colonoscopy ( P = 0.035).
CONCLUSIONS: There were marginal differences between high definition colonoscopy and SVE for the detection of colonic polyps/adenomas. High definition colonoscopy did not improve the detection of high risk adenomas. Due to differences in the adenoma detection rate between the studies and the nonrandomized study design of three of the five studies, these results need to be interpreted with caution. Prospective randomized trials looking at long term outcomes such as rates of interval or missed cancers are needed to clarify the clinical implications. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21360420     DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1256207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  57 in total

1.  Endoscopy: High-definition imaging and NBI-improving colonic imaging?

Authors:  Jayan Mannath; Krish Ragunath
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 2.  New imaging techniques and opportunities in endoscopy.

Authors:  Ralf Kiesslich; Martin Goetz; Arthur Hoffman; Peter Robert Galle
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 3.  Advanced endoscopic imaging to improve adenoma detection.

Authors:  Helmut Neumann; Andreas Nägel; Andrea Buda
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-03-16

Review 4.  A guide to multimodal endoscopy imaging for gastrointestinal malignancy - an early indicator.

Authors:  Arthur Hoffman; Henrik Manner; Johannes W Rey; Ralf Kiesslich
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 46.802

5.  Efficacy of cap-assisted colonoscopy according to lesion location and endoscopist training level.

Authors:  Dong Jun Kim; Hyung Wook Kim; Su Bum Park; Dae Hwan Kang; Cheol Woong Choi; Joung Boom Hong; Byoung Hoon Ji; Chang Seok Lee
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Does the "polyp paradox" really exist?

Authors:  Helmut Neumann; Rungsun Rerknimitr
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Novel colonoscopic imaging techniques.

Authors:  Ralf Kiesslich
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2013-04

Review 8.  Advances in endoscopy for colorectal polyp detection and classification.

Authors:  Vijeta Pamudurthy; Nayna Lodhia; Vani J A Konda
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-12-18

9.  Adenoma detection in excellent versus good bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Danielle M Tholey; Corbett E Shelton; Gloria Francis; Archana Anantharaman; Robert A Frankel; Paurush Shah; Amy Coan; Sarah E Hegarty; Benjamin E Leiby; David M Kastenberg
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.062

10.  High-definition colonoscopy with i-Scan: better diagnosis for small polyps and flat adenomas.

Authors:  Pier Alberto Testoni; Chiara Notaristefano; Cristian Vailati; Milena Di Leo; Edi Viale
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-07       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.