0
selected
-
1.
Effectiveness and safety of NER1006 versus standard bowel preparations: A meta-analysis of randomized phase-3 clinical trials.
Maida, M, Macaluso, FS, Sferrazza, S, Ventimiglia, M, Sinagra, E
Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver. 2020;(8):833-839
Abstract
BACKGROUND A 1 L PEG-based preparation for colonoscopy (NER1006) has been recently developed. AIMS We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to explore the effectiveness and safety of NER1006 versus traditional preparations. METHODS PubMed/Medline and Embase were systematically searched through January 2020 for phase-3 RCTs comparing NER1006 versus standard preparations. RESULTS Three RCTs (1879 participants) met the inclusion criteria and were included. The analysis showed a higher cleansing success for NER1006 compared standard preparations (OR=1.28; 95% CI 1.00-1.62; p = 0.047, I2=0%) as well as a greater high-quality cleansing of the right colon (OR=2.13; 95% CI 1.16-3.94; p = 0.015, I2=76.0%) when assessed by the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS). The pooled estimate of the NER1006 effect on ADR showed a higher, although not significant, ADR of the right colon (OR=1.19; 95% CI 0.73-1.92; p = 0.485, I2=53%). When considering the impact of NER1006 on mild to moderate treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), we observed a significant pooled estimate of TEAEs (OR=2.31; 95% CI 1.82-2.94; p<0.001, I2=0%). CONCLUSIONS When compared to traditional preparations, NER1006 showed a better overall cleansing of the colon as well as a greater high-quality cleansing of the right colon, with comparable ADR. A higher incidence of mild to moderate TEAEs was observed for NER1006, in the absence of serious adverse events.
-
2.
Optimal Management of Malignant Polyps, From Endoscopic Assessment and Resection to Decisions About Surgery.
Rex, DK, Shaukat, A, Wallace, MB
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2019;(8):1428-1437
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is defined clinically as invasion of dysplastic cells into the submucosa. Lesions with submucosal invasion but without invasion into the muscularis propria are generally called malignant polyps. A stepwise approach produces optimal management of malignant polyps (including polypoid and flat/depressed lesions). The first step is to avoid endoscopic resection of non-pedunculated lesions with endoscopic features that predict deep submucosal invasion. Lesions without such features are candidates for endoscopic resection. The second step is to assess candidates for endoscopic resection for features that predict an increased risk of superficial submucosal invasion. Such lesions should be considered for en bloc endoscopic excision if feasible. The third step is giving patients with endoscopically resected malignant polyps good advice regarding whether to undergo adjuvant therapy, usually surgery. We review the endoscopic and histologic criteria that guide clinicians through these steps.
-
3.
Does Increased Adenoma Detection Reduce the Risk of Colorectal Cancer, and How Good Do We Need to Be?
Dilly, CK, Kahi, CJ
Current gastroenterology reports. 2019;(4):9
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable with colonoscopy and other screening modalities. However, the effectiveness of screening and surveillance depends on the quality of the colonoscopy exam. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the best-validated metric by which we measure individual physicians' performance. RECENT FINDINGS Recent evidence suggests that ADR benchmarks may be inappropriately low. There is proof that improving ADR leads to significant reductions in post-colonoscopy CRC (PCCRC). Two studies have demonstrated that when a colonoscopy is performed by physicians with higher ADRs, patients are less likely to have advanced adenomas on surveillance and less likely to develop or die from PCCRC. Finally, there is at least some evidence that higher ADRs do not lead to more cumulative surveillance exams. The ADR is a useful outcome measure that can provide individual endoscopists and their patients with information about the likelihood of developing PCCRC. To achieve the lowest possible PCCRC rate, we should be striving for higher ADRs. While strategies and innovations may help a bit in improving ADRs, our efforts should focus on ensuring a complete mucosal exam for each patient. Behavioral psychology theories may provide useful frameworks for studying motivating factors that drive a careful exam.
-
4.
An overview of deep learning algorithms and water exchange in colonoscopy in improving adenoma detection.
Hsieh, YH, Leung, FW
Expert review of gastroenterology & hepatology. 2019;(12):1153-1160
Abstract
Introduction: Among the Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy Editorial Board top 10 topics in advances in endoscopy in 2018, water exchange colonoscopy and artificial intelligence were both considered important advances. Artificial intelligence holds the potential to increase and water exchange significantly increases adenoma detection.Areas covered: The authors searched MEDLINE (1998-2019) using the following medical subject terms: water-aided, water-assisted and water exchange colonoscopy, adenoma, artificial intelligence, deep learning, computer-assisted detection, and neural networks. Additional related studies were manually searched from the reference lists of publications. Only fully published journal articles in English were reviewed. The latest date of the search was Aug10, 2019. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning contribute to the promise of real-time computer-aided detection diagnosis. By emphasizing near-complete suction of infused water during insertion, water exchange provides salvage cleaning and decreases cleaning-related multi-tasking distractions during withdrawal, increasing adenoma detection. The review will address how artificial intelligence and water exchange can complement each other in improving adenoma detection during colonoscopy.Expert opinion: In 5 years, research on artificial intelligence will likely achieve real-time application and evaluation of factors contributing to quality colonoscopy. Better understanding and more widespread use of water exchange will be possible.
-
5.
Is water exchange superior to water immersion for colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Chen, Z, Li, Z, Yu, X, Wang, G
Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. 2018;(5):259-267
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recently, water exchange (WE) instead of water immersion (WI) for colonoscopy has been proposed to decrease pain and improve adenoma detection rate (ADR). This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to assess whether WE is superior to WI based on the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS We searched studies from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Only RCTs were eligible for our study. The pooled risk ratios (RRs), pooled mean difference (MD), and pooled 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using the fixed-effects model or random-effects model based on heterogeneity. RESULTS Five RCTs consisting of 2229 colonoscopies were included in this study. WE was associated with a significantly higher ADR than WI (RR = 1.18; CI = 1.05-1.32; P = 0.004), especially in right colon (RR = 1.31; CI = 1.07-1.61; P = 0.01). Compared with WI, WE was confirmed with lower pain score, higher Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score, but more infused water during insertion. There was no statistical difference between WE and WI in cecal intubation rate and the number of patients who had willingness to repeat the examination. Furthermore, both total procedure time and cecal intubation time in WE were significantly longer than that in WI (MD = 2.66; CI = 1.42-3.90; P < 0.0001; vs MD = 4.58; CI = 4.01-5.15; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that WE is superior to WI in improving ADR, attenuating insertion pain and providing better bowel cleansing, but inferior in time and consumption of infused water consumption during insertion.
-
6.
Blood Lipid Concentrations and Colorectal Adenomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Colonoscopy Studies in Asia, 2000-2014.
Passarelli, MN, Newcomb, PA
American journal of epidemiology. 2016;(8):691-700
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
It is unclear whether dyslipidemia is associated with risk of colorectal neoplasia. The incidence of both conditions is increasing in Asia, motivating a number of new studies from this region. We performed a systematic literature search of Asian colonoscopy-based studies that collected blood lipid concentrations at the time of endoscopy. Persons found to have colorectal adenoma were considered cases, and those found to be adenoma-free were considered controls. Seventeen studies published between 2000 and 2014 met inclusion criteria, collectively enrolling 17,387 cases and 30,427 controls. Mean differences and adjusted odds ratios were summarized with random-effects meta-analyses. Compared with controls, cases had higher total cholesterol (mean difference (MD) = 2.4 mg/dL, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2, 4.6), higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD = 1.3 mg/dL, 95% CI: 0.1, 2.6), higher triglyceride (MD = 16.4 mg/dL, 95% CI: 11.2, 21.5), and lower high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (MD = -2.1 mg/dL, 95% CI: -2.7, -1.6) concentrations. Based on adjusted odds ratios, associations for 40-mg/dL-higher triglyceride levels (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.21) and 10-mg/dL-higher HDL cholesterol levels (odds ratio = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.00) achieved statistical significance. Persons with adenoma were more likely to have unfavorable cholesterol profiles at the time of colonoscopy than those without adenoma. The most convincing evidence for an association between dyslipidemia and colorectal neoplasia was observed for hypertriglyceridemia.
-
7.
Colorectal Cancer in the Arab World--Screening Practices and Future Prospects.
Arafa, MA, Farhat, K
Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP. 2015;(17):7425-30
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates have dropped 30% in the US in the last 10 years among adults ages 50 and older due to the widespread uptake of colonoscopy, yet incidences in the Arab countries have been increasing in the past ten years, albeit with lower figures when compared with developed countries. Lifestyle changes, food consumption patterns and obesity have been observed during the past years where the regular consumption of traditional foods is being replaced with more Western-style and ready-made foods. Most high income countries have implemented population based colorectal cancer screening programs, which aid in decreasing the incidence and mortality of cancer, while these are lacking in most of the Arab world countries due to many cultural and religious barriers to CRC screening as well as lack of high education or familiarity. What is needed is health education to modify risky lifestyle, and to increase motives and enhance positive attitudes towards early screening especially amongst high risk groups in addition to policy designed to encourage healthier living.
-
8.
[DIVERTICULAR DISEASE OF LARGE BOWEL: DIAGNOSIS, SURGICAL TACTICS].
Borota, AV, Kukhto, AP, Baziyan-Kukhto, NK
Klinichna khirurhiia. 2015;(4):69-72
-
9.
Effect of hyoscine N-butylbromide on adenoma detection rate: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Madhoun, MF, Ali, T, Tierney, WM, Maple, JT
Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society. 2015;(3):354-60
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM Anti-spasmodic drugs may facilitate mucosal inspection during colonoscopy. The impact of hyoscine N-butylbromide (HBB) on polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) is unclear. METHODS We conducted a reproducible literature search of multiple databases. Two reviewers independently compared manuscripts for PDR, ADR, advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), and rates of complications. Pooling was conducted by fixed-effects and random-effects models. Relative risk (RR) estimates were calculated (95% confidence interval). I(2) index assessed heterogeneity. RESULTS Patient demographics were comparable. The pooled analysis showed a trend toward improving PDR and ADR among the HBB group compared with the placebo group but failed to reach statistical significance, (46% vs 43%, RR = 1.08 [0.94, 1.25], P = 0.27), (31% vs 28%, RR = 1.12 [0.97, 1.29], P = 0.11) respectively. CONCLUSION HBB during colonoscopy may provide marginal improvements in ADR and PDR. However, heterogeneity in the available data precludes firm conclusions at this time.
-
10.
Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes.
Schreuders, EH, Ruco, A, Rabeneck, L, Schoen, RE, Sung, JJ, Young, GP, Kuipers, EJ
Gut. 2015;(10):1637-49
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks third among the most commonly diagnosed cancers worldwide, with wide geographical variation in incidence and mortality across the world. Despite proof that screening can decrease CRC incidence and mortality, CRC screening is only offered to a small proportion of the target population worldwide. Throughout the world there are widespread differences in CRC screening implementation status and strategy. Differences can be attributed to geographical variation in CRC incidence, economic resources, healthcare structure and infrastructure to support screening such as the ability to identify the target population at risk and cancer registry availability. This review highlights issues to consider when implementing a CRC screening programme and gives a worldwide overview of CRC burden and the current status of screening programmes, with focus on international differences.