Literature DB >> 27988288

Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy using water exchange, water immersion, and air insufflation.

Yu-Hsi Hsieh1, Chih-Wei Tseng1, Chi-Tan Hu2, Malcolm Koo3, Felix W Leung4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma of any size, is a quality indicator. We tested the hypothesis that water exchange (WE) improves ADR but water immersion (WI) has no adverse effect on ADR compared with air insufflation (AI).
METHODS: A prospective study was conducted at the Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital in southern Taiwan and the Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital in eastern Taiwan on patients randomly assigned to WE, WI, or AI with stratification by the 3 study colonoscopists. The primary outcome was ADR.
RESULTS: From July 2013 to December 2015, 651 patients were recruited and randomized into 3 groups with a 1:1:1 ratio (217 patients per group). Overall, ADR met quality standards: WE 49.8% (95% CI, 43.2%-56.4%), AI 37.8% (95% CI, 31.6%-44.4%), and WI 40.6% (95% CI, 34.2%-47.2%). Compared with AI, WE significantly increased ADR (P = .016). There was no difference between WI and WE. ADRs of WI and AI were comparable. Compared with AI, WE confirmed a longer insertion time, higher cleanliness score, but similar adenoma per positive colonoscopy (APPC) and withdrawal time with polypectomy. Subgroup analysis found WE significantly increased ADR in propofol-sedated patients. Multivariate generalized linear mixed model analysis revealed that age ≥50 years, WE (vs AI), colonoscopy indication, no previous history of colonoscopy, and withdrawal time >8 minutes were significant predictors of increased ADR.
CONCLUSIONS: Confirmation of prior reports showing WE, but not WI, increased ADR further strengthened the validity of our observations. WE significantly increased ADR in propofol-sedated patients. The outcome differences justify assessment of the role of WE in colorectal cancer prevention. Similar APPC and withdrawal times suggest that adequate inspection was performed on colonoscope withdrawal in each of the study arms. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01894191.).
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27988288     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  21 in total

1.  Colonoscope Insertion: Is the Future Underwater.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Sergio Cadoni
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-11-25

2.  Impact of propofol sedation versus opioid/benzodiazepine sedation on colonoscopy outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Muhammad Aziz; Simcha Weissman; Rawish Fatima; Zubair Khan; Babu P Mohan; Tej I Mehta; Wade Lee-Smith; Ammar Hassan; Michael Sciarra; Ali Nawras; Douglas G Adler
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-05-25

3.  Anesthesia Assistance in Screening Colonoscopy and Adenoma Detection Rate Among Trainees.

Authors:  Anna Krigel; Anish Patel; Jeremy Kaplan; Xiao-Fei Kong; Reuben Garcia-Carrasquillo; Benjamin Lebwohl; Suneeta Krishnareddy
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Air Insufflation May Still be Ideal for Adenoma Detection.

Authors:  Felix Leung; Hui Jia; Yanglin Pan
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Adenoma and Advanced Adenoma Detection Rates of Water Exchange, Endocuff, and Cap Colonoscopy: A Network Meta-Analysis with Pooled Data of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Paul P Shao; Aileen Bui; Tahmineh Romero; Hui Jia; Felix W Leung
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  In split-dose prepared patients, water exchange could significantly improve overall and segmental bowel preparation scores and increase adenoma detection rate.

Authors:  Felix W Leung
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-02-08

7.  Reduction of multitasking distractions underlies the higher adenoma detection rate of water exchange compared to air insufflation - blinded analysis of withdrawal phase videos.

Authors:  Yu-Hsi Hsieh; Malcolm Koo; Chih-Wei Tseng; Hsiu-Wen Yang; Felix W Leung
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 4.623

8.  A prospective RCT comparing combined chromoendoscopy with water exchange (CWE) vs water exchange (WE) vs air insufflation (AI) in adenoma detection in screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  J W Leung; A W Yen; H Jia; C Opada; A Melnik; J Atkins; C Feller; M D Wilson; F W Leung
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 4.623

9.  Can Water Exchange Improve Patient Tolerance in Unsedated Colonoscopy A Prospective Comparative Study.

Authors:  Richard Azevedo; Cátia Leitão; João Pinto; Helena Ribeiro; Flávio Pereira; Ana Caldeira; António Banhudo
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-11-16

10.  Split-dose bowel preparation versus water exchange and adenoma detection rate: have we arrived there yet?

Authors:  Felix W Leung
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-04-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.