Literature DB >> 32409588

Designs of colonoscopic adenoma detection trials: more positive results with tandem than with parallel studies - an analysis of studies on imaging techniques and mechanical devices.

Katharina Zimmermann-Fraedrich1, Heiko Pohl2, Thomas Rösch3, Douglas K Rex4, Cesare Hassan5, Evelien Dekker6, Michal Filip Kaminski7, Michael Bretthauer8,9, Jocelyn de Heer1, Yuki Werner1, Guido Schachschal1, Stefan Groth10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been shown to correlate with interval cancers after screening colonoscopy and is commonly used as surrogate parameter for its outcome quality. ADR improvements by various techniques have been studied in randomised trials using either parallel or tandem methodololgy.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was done on randomised trials (full papers, English language) on tandem or parallel studies using either adenoma miss rates (AMR) or ADR as main outcome to test different novel technologies on imaging (new endoscope generation, narrow band imaging, iScan, Fujinon intelligent chromoendoscopy/blue laser imaging and wide angle scopes) and mechanical devices (transparent caps, endocuff, endorings and balloons). Available meta analyses were also screened for randomised studies.
RESULTS: Overall, 24 randomised tandem trials with AMR (variable definitions and methodology) and 42 parallel studies using ADR (homogeneous methodology) as primary outcome were included. Significant differences in favour of the new method were found in 66.7% of tandem studies (8222 patients) but in only 23.8% of parallel studies (28 059 patients), with higher rates of positive studies for mechanical devices than for imaging methods. In a random-effects model, small absolute risk differences were found, but these were double in magnitude for tandem as compared with parallel studies (imaging: tandem 0.04 (0.01, 0.07), parallel 0.02 (0.00, 0.04); mechanical devices: tandem 0.08 (0.00, 0.15), parallel 0.04 (0.01, 0.07)). Nevertheless, 94.2% of missed adenomas in the tandem studies were small (<1 cm) and/or non-advanced.
CONCLUSIONS: A tandem study is more likely to yield positive results than a simple parallel trial; this may be due to the use of different parameters, variable definitions and methodology, and perhaps also a higher likelihood of bias. Therefore, we suggest to accept positive results of tandem studies only if accompanied by positive results from parallel trials. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  colonic adenomas; colonoscopy

Year:  2020        PMID: 32409588     DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-320984

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  1 in total

1.  Reducing adenoma miss rate of colonoscopy assisted by artificial intelligence: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Shunsuke Kamba; Naoto Tamai; Iduru Saitoh; Hiroaki Matsui; Hideka Horiuchi; Masakuni Kobayashi; Taku Sakamoto; Mai Ego; Akihiro Fukuda; Aya Tonouchi; Yuki Shimahara; Masako Nishikawa; Haruo Nishino; Yutaka Saito; Kazuki Sumiyama
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 7.527

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.