Literature DB >> 25521574

Magnetic endoscopic imaging as an adjuvant to elective colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Anders Mark-Christensen1, Søren Brandsborg1, Lene Hjerrild Iversen1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The use of magnetic endoscopic imaging (MEI) to visualize scope configuration in three dimensions is thought to increase procedural efficiency and diminish discomfort associated with colonoscopy. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the performance of MEI in colonoscopy.
METHODS: The electronic databases Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Randomized Trials were searched. Methodological quality was assessed using the Jadad score. Odds ratios (OR) or risk differences for dichotomous variables and mean differences for continuous outcomes were calculated with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: A total of 13 randomized studies met eligibility criteria and were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. MEI was associated with a significantly lower risk of failed cecal intubation (risk difference 4 %, 95 %CI 0 % - 7 %; P = 0.03), lower cecal intubation time (mean difference 0.58 minutes, 95 %CI 0.28 - 0.88; P < 0.001), and lower pain scores as estimated by visual analog scales (mean difference 0.45 cm, 95 %CI 0.03 - 0.86; P = 0.03) compared with conventional colonoscopy. On subgroup stratification of outcome according to endoscopist experience, failure rates were unaffected, but experienced colonoscopists reduced intubation times with MEI (mean difference 0.78 minutes, 95 %CI 0.12 - 1.43; P = 0.02). Sensitivity analyses of high-quality studies (Jadad score ≥ 3) showed no significant difference in failure rate (risk difference 4 %, 95 %CI 0 % - 8 %; P = 0.07) or intubation time (mean difference 0.56 minutes, 95 %CI - 0.15 to 1.28; P = 0.12).
CONCLUSION: Adjuvant MEI is associated with a lower failure risk and shorter time to cecal intubation during elective colonoscopy compared with conventional colonoscopy. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25521574     DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1390767

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


  10 in total

1.  Gradual stiffness versus magnetic imaging-guided variable stiffness colonoscopes: A randomized noninferiority trial.

Authors:  Kjetil Garborg; Håvard Wiig; Audun Hasund; Jon Matre; Øyvind Holme; Geir Noraberg; Magnus Løberg; Mette Kalager; Hans-Olov Adami; Michael Bretthauer
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 2.  Quality Assurance in Endoscopy: Which Parameters?

Authors:  Ulrike W Denzer
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2016-01-29

Review 3.  Quality Indicators in Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Kjetil Garborg; Thomas de Lange; Michael Bretthauer
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-09

4.  Efficiency and patient experience with propofol vs conventional sedation: A prospective study.

Authors:  Patrick Thornley; Mohammad Al Beshir; James Gregor; Andreas Antoniou; Nitin Khanna
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-02-25

5.  Accuracy of polyp localization at colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sam A O'Connor; David G Hewett; Marcus O Watson; Bradley J Kendall; Luke F Hourigan; Gerald Holtmann
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2016-05-19

Review 6.  Training in Endoscopy: Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Hyun Joo Jang
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2017-07-31

Review 7.  Recent advances in colonoscopy.

Authors:  Edward Seward
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-07-09

8.  Using computerized assessment in simulated colonoscopy: a validation study.

Authors:  Andreas Slot Vilmann; Christian Lachenmeier; Morten Bo Søndergaard Svendsen; Bo Søndergaard; Yoon Soo Park; Lars Bo Svendsen; Lars Konge
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-05-25

9.  Efficacy of a small-caliber colonoscope for pain in female patients during unsedated colonoscopy: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Yasuhiko Hamada; Kyosuke Tanaka; Masaki Katsurahara; Noriyuki Horiki; Reiko Yamada; Junya Tsuboi; Misaki Nakamura; Satoshi Tamaru; Tomomi Yamada; Yoshiyuki Takei
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2021-06-17

10.  Outcomes of use of electromagnetic guidance with responsive insertion technology (RIT) during colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Shajan Peter; Nipun B Reddy; Mohammed Naseemuddin; Jenine N Zaibaq; Gerald McGwin; C Mel Wilcox
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2019-01-17
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.