1.
Enhanced instructions improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Guo, X, Yang, Z, Zhao, L, Leung, F, Luo, H, Kang, X, Li, X, Jia, H, Yang, S, Tao, Q, et al
Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2017;(1):90-97.e6
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS The success of a colonoscopy is highly dependent on the quality of bowel preparation (BP). Many patients have poor BP due to non-compliance with regular instructions. Reports concerning the effects of enhanced instructions on BP quality are inconsistent. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare BP quality between patients receiving enhanced instructions in addition to regular instructions and those who received regular instructions only. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies published for August 2015. The quality of BP (adequate/inadequate), adenoma detection rate, polyp detection rate, willingness to repeat preparation, and adverse events were estimated by using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with random effects models. RESULTS Eight randomized controlled trials (n = 3795) were included. Patients who received enhanced instructions showed significantly better BP quality than those receiving only regular instructions (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.65-3.35; P < .001). Subgroup analysis showed that the beneficial effects of enhanced instructions on BP quality were consistent among patients receiving different purgative types, administration methods, or diet restriction (all P < .05). Patients in the enhanced instructions group showed more willingness to repeat the preparation (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.20-3.04; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS Enhanced instructions significantly improved the quality of BP and willingness to repeat the preparation in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Factors related to patient instructions appear to be as important as the preparation method itself in improving BP quality.
2.
Water Exchange Method Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Jia, H, Pan, Y, Guo, X, Zhao, L, Wang, X, Zhang, L, Dong, T, Luo, H, Ge, Z, Liu, J, et al
The American journal of gastroenterology. 2017;(4):568-576
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key colonoscopy quality indicator in Western clinical literature. Our low ADR prompted us to assess novel methods to improve performance. Western retrospective reports suggested that water exchange (WE) could increase ADR. However, most of these studies used pain score or intubation rate as the primary outcome. Here we test the hypothesis that WE significantly increases ADR among Chinese colonoscopists and design a prospective randomized controlled trial using ADR as our primary outcome. METHODS This prospective, randomized controlled trial was performed at six centers in China. Screening, surveillance, and diagnostic cases were randomized to be examined by WE or traditional air insufflation (AI) method. The primary outcome was ADR. RESULTS From April 2014 to July 2015, 3,303 patients were randomized to WE (n=1,653) and AI (n=1,650). The baseline characteristics were comparable. Overall ADR was 18.3% (WE) and 13.4% (AI) (relative risk 1.45, 95% confidential interval: 1.20-1.75, P<0.001). ADR in screening patients using AI was 25.8% (male) and 15.7% (female). ADR in screening patients aged >50 years old was 29.4% (WE) and 22.9% (AI) (relative risk 1.09, 95% confidential interval: 1.00-1.19, P=0.040). The increase by WE was reproducibly observed in all indication categories, and significant in screening and diagnostic cases. The limitation imposed by the unblinded investigators was mitigated by comparable inspection times in cases without polyps, similar adenoma per positive colonoscopy, and reproducible enhancement of ADR and adenoma per colonoscopy by WE across all eight investigators. CONCLUSIONS This prospective study confirms Western retrospective data that WE significantly improves ADR among Chinese colonoscopists. WE may be superior to AI for screening colonoscopy in China. Colonoscopists elsewhere with low ADR might consider evaluating WE for performance improvement.