[Double review of the right colon vs single review during colonoscopy for the detection of colon polyps and adenomas: systematic review of the literature].

Erlison Mauricio Daza Castro, Alberto Ramon Torres López, Diego Aponte, Jose Nicolas Rocha Rodríguez, Luis Carlos Sabbagh
{"title":"[Double review of the right colon vs single review during colonoscopy for the detection of colon polyps and adenomas: systematic review of the literature].","authors":"Erlison Mauricio Daza Castro, Alberto Ramon Torres López, Diego Aponte, Jose Nicolas Rocha Rodríguez, Luis Carlos Sabbagh","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colonoscopy screening is an effective method to prevent colon cancer through the detection of polyps on which colon cancer develops in a higher percentage; however, the detection of these lesions varies in the different segments of the colon and the detection rate of them in the right colon is usually lower.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study is to evaluate whether double endoscopic revision of the right colon during colonoscopy is a mechanism to improve its performance in terms of polyp detection rate (TDP) and adenoma detection rate (ADR).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature including randomized clinical trials that evaluated repeat right-sight examination by colonoscopy compared to standard view to improve detection of polyps and adenomas. The protocol for this decision was published in PROSPERO under the code CRD42022356509.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies involving 2729 participants were included. Polyp detection was reported in 585/1197 patients (48.87%) after the second review, compared with 537/1206 (44.52%) of patients who received a single examination (p< 0.05), for a combined RR of 1.09 (95% CI: 0.97-1.23) (I2 was 44%). Detection of adenomas was reported in 830/1513 patients (54.75%) after the second review, compared with 779/1509 (51.62%) of patients who received a single examination (p < 0.05), for a combined RR of 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00-1.13) (I2 was 0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Second examination of the right colon by colonoscopy may have a modest improvement in the detection of polyps and adenomas.</p>","PeriodicalId":35807,"journal":{"name":"Revista de gastroenterologia del Peru : organo oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterologia del Peru","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de gastroenterologia del Peru : organo oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterologia del Peru","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Colonoscopy screening is an effective method to prevent colon cancer through the detection of polyps on which colon cancer develops in a higher percentage; however, the detection of these lesions varies in the different segments of the colon and the detection rate of them in the right colon is usually lower.

Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate whether double endoscopic revision of the right colon during colonoscopy is a mechanism to improve its performance in terms of polyp detection rate (TDP) and adenoma detection rate (ADR).

Materials and methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature including randomized clinical trials that evaluated repeat right-sight examination by colonoscopy compared to standard view to improve detection of polyps and adenomas. The protocol for this decision was published in PROSPERO under the code CRD42022356509.

Results: Five studies involving 2729 participants were included. Polyp detection was reported in 585/1197 patients (48.87%) after the second review, compared with 537/1206 (44.52%) of patients who received a single examination (p< 0.05), for a combined RR of 1.09 (95% CI: 0.97-1.23) (I2 was 44%). Detection of adenomas was reported in 830/1513 patients (54.75%) after the second review, compared with 779/1509 (51.62%) of patients who received a single examination (p < 0.05), for a combined RR of 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00-1.13) (I2 was 0%).

Conclusion: Second examination of the right colon by colonoscopy may have a modest improvement in the detection of polyps and adenomas.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[在结肠镜检查中对右结肠进行双重检查与单一检查以检测结肠息肉和腺瘤:文献的系统性回顾]。
结肠镜筛查是一种通过检测息肉预防结肠癌的有效方法,息肉上发生结肠癌的比例较高;然而,这些病变在结肠不同区段的检出率各不相同,右侧结肠的检出率通常较低:本研究的目的是评估在结肠镜检查过程中对右侧结肠进行双内镜修整是否是提高其息肉检出率(TDP)和腺瘤检出率(ADR)的一种机制:对包括随机临床试验在内的文献进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,这些临床试验评估了结肠镜重复右视角检查与标准视角检查的比较,以提高息肉和腺瘤的检出率。该决策方案已在 PROSPERO 上公布,代码为 CRD42022356509:结果:共纳入五项研究,涉及 2729 名参与者。585/1197例患者(48.87%)在第二次复查后发现了息肉,而接受单次检查的患者为537/1206例(44.52%)(P< 0.05),综合RR为1.09(95% CI:0.97-1.23)(I2为44%)。830/1513例患者(54.75%)在二次检查后发现腺瘤,而接受单次检查的患者为779/1509例(51.62%)(P<0.05),合计RR为1.06(95% CI:1.00-1.13)(I2为0%):结论:通过结肠镜对右侧结肠进行二次检查可适度提高息肉和腺瘤的检出率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: La REVISTA DE GASTROENTEROLOGíA DEL PERÚ, es la publicación oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú que publica artículos originales, artículos de revisión, reporte de casos, cartas e información general de la especialidad; dirigido a los profesionales de la salud con especial interés en la gastroenterología. La Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú es una publicación de periodicidad trimestral y tiene como objetivo la publicación de artículos científicos inéditos en el campo de la gastroenterología, proporcionando información actualizada y relevante de la especialidad y áreas afines. La Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú publica artículos en dos idiomas, español e inglés, a texto completo en la versión impresa yelectrónica. Los artículos científicos son sometidos a revisores o árbitros nacionales e internacionales, especialistas que opinan bajo la modalidad de doble ciego y de manera anónima sobre la calidad y validez de los mismos. El número de revisores depende del tipo de artículo, dos revisores como mínimo para artículos originales y uno como mínimo para otros tipos de artículos.
期刊最新文献
[Commun salt application as a treatment for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy periostomal granuloma]. [Conventional colonoscopy vs. cap-assisted colonoscopy: there are differences in colonoscopy performance?] [Efficaccy of probiotic in the treatment of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. Systematic review and meta-analysis]. [Evaluation of the usability of patients attended in gastrointestinal telemedicine postpandemic at University clinic]. [Procedure, reading and interpretation of capsule endoscopy].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1