Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality indicator for colonoscopy. Interval cancer (IC) is associated with low ADR. Every 1% increase in ADR is associated with a 3% and 5% reduction of the risk of IC and fatal IC, respectively. Water exchange (WE) colonoscopy is considered the best insertion method for improving ADR when compared with water immersion and air insufflation (AI). Attachment devices such as cap and Endocuff also improve ADR. We assessed the effectiveness of improving ADR between WE, cap and Endocuff colonoscopy by indirect comparison with AI as the common comparator. METHODS: A literature search was done to identify all relevant RCTs comparing WE, cap and Endocuff with AI colonoscopy published since 2000 as full text in English and including ADR among the outcomes. EMBASE, Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library were searched systematically for all RCTs that included the following terms in their titles, abstracts, or keyword lists: colonoscopy, and water exchange, cap, or Endocuff. Two investigators screened the articles manually and separately. The results were compared; and a discussion was held with a third investigator to resolve any discrepancies. RESULTS: A total of 1,453 articles resulted from initial keywords search. 37 articles were identified based on titles and abstracts alone. After thorough review of full texts, and discussion between the investigators, 21 RCTs were included in the analysis. A total of 16,572 subjects underwent AI, WE, cap (CC) or Endocuff (EC) colonoscopy. ADR of WE, CC, and EC were compared to AI. Table 1 shows that there is a significant difference in ADR between AI and WE (24.2%, 30.8%, P = 0.0001). ADR in AI and EC were significantly different (41.7%, 48.0%, P = 0.0001). No significant difference in ADR exists between AI and CC, (36.8%, 36.6%, P = 0.92). ADR as a percentage change of AI in WE, EC and CC were 27.4%, 15.1% and -0.42%, respectively. We found that WE and EC significantly improved ADR while CC does not significantly change ADR. Compared to EC and CC, WE has a higher percentage increase in ADR. This greater increase in ADR by WE may be related to the low ADR in the AI group. CONCLUSION: The impact of the study method in enhancing overall ADR is more prominent with the WE method, especially in patient cohort with lower ADR.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
