Cargando…

A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy

Background and aim: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are new techniques capable of providing deep enteroscopy. Results of individual studies comparing these techniques have not been able to identify a superior strategy. Our aim was to systematically pool all avai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wadhwa, Vaibhav, Sethi, Saurabh, Tewani, Sumeet, Garg, Sushil Kumar, Pleskow, Douglas K., Chuttani, Ram, Berzin, Tyler M., Sethi, Nidhi, Sawhney, Mandeep S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4423464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25698560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gastro/gov003
_version_ 1782370216107311104
author Wadhwa, Vaibhav
Sethi, Saurabh
Tewani, Sumeet
Garg, Sushil Kumar
Pleskow, Douglas K.
Chuttani, Ram
Berzin, Tyler M.
Sethi, Nidhi
Sawhney, Mandeep S.
author_facet Wadhwa, Vaibhav
Sethi, Saurabh
Tewani, Sumeet
Garg, Sushil Kumar
Pleskow, Douglas K.
Chuttani, Ram
Berzin, Tyler M.
Sethi, Nidhi
Sawhney, Mandeep S.
author_sort Wadhwa, Vaibhav
collection PubMed
description Background and aim: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are new techniques capable of providing deep enteroscopy. Results of individual studies comparing these techniques have not been able to identify a superior strategy. Our aim was to systematically pool all available studies to compare the efficacy and safety of DBE with SBE for evaluation of the small bowel. Methods: Databases were searched, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The main outcome measures were complete small-bowel visualization, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and complication rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan version 5.2). Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on the absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. We used the χ(2) and I(2) test to assess heterogeneity between trials. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Four prospective, randomized, controlled trials with a total of 375 patients were identified. DBE was superior to SBE for visualization of the entire small bowel [pooled RR = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.19–0.73; P = 0.004)]. DBE and SBE were similar in ability to provide diagnosis [pooled RR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.77–1.17; P = 0.62)]. There was no significant difference between DBE and SBE in therapeutic yield [pooled RR = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.59–1.04; P = 0.09)] and complication rate [pooled RR = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28–4.22); P = 0.91]. Conclusions: DBE was superior to SBE with regard to complete small bowel visualization. DBE was similar to SBE with regard to diagnostic yield, ability to provide treatment and complication rate, but these results should be interpreted with caution as they is based on very few studies and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low to moderate, due to the small sample size.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4423464
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44234642015-05-13 A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy Wadhwa, Vaibhav Sethi, Saurabh Tewani, Sumeet Garg, Sushil Kumar Pleskow, Douglas K. Chuttani, Ram Berzin, Tyler M. Sethi, Nidhi Sawhney, Mandeep S. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) Meta-Analysis Background and aim: Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are new techniques capable of providing deep enteroscopy. Results of individual studies comparing these techniques have not been able to identify a superior strategy. Our aim was to systematically pool all available studies to compare the efficacy and safety of DBE with SBE for evaluation of the small bowel. Methods: Databases were searched, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The main outcome measures were complete small-bowel visualization, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and complication rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan version 5.2). Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on the absence or presence of significant heterogeneity. We used the χ(2) and I(2) test to assess heterogeneity between trials. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Four prospective, randomized, controlled trials with a total of 375 patients were identified. DBE was superior to SBE for visualization of the entire small bowel [pooled RR = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.19–0.73; P = 0.004)]. DBE and SBE were similar in ability to provide diagnosis [pooled RR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.77–1.17; P = 0.62)]. There was no significant difference between DBE and SBE in therapeutic yield [pooled RR = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.59–1.04; P = 0.09)] and complication rate [pooled RR = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28–4.22); P = 0.91]. Conclusions: DBE was superior to SBE with regard to complete small bowel visualization. DBE was similar to SBE with regard to diagnostic yield, ability to provide treatment and complication rate, but these results should be interpreted with caution as they is based on very few studies and the overall quality of the evidence was rated as low to moderate, due to the small sample size. Oxford University Press 2015-05 2015-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4423464/ /pubmed/25698560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gastro/gov003 Text en © The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press and the Digestive Science Publishing Co. Limited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Wadhwa, Vaibhav
Sethi, Saurabh
Tewani, Sumeet
Garg, Sushil Kumar
Pleskow, Douglas K.
Chuttani, Ram
Berzin, Tyler M.
Sethi, Nidhi
Sawhney, Mandeep S.
A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title_full A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title_fullStr A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title_full_unstemmed A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title_short A meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
title_sort meta-analysis on efficacy and safety: single-balloon vs. double-balloon enteroscopy
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4423464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25698560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gastro/gov003
work_keys_str_mv AT wadhwavaibhav ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sethisaurabh ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT tewanisumeet ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT gargsushilkumar ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT pleskowdouglask ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT chuttaniram ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT berzintylerm ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sethinidhi ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sawhneymandeeps ametaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT wadhwavaibhav metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sethisaurabh metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT tewanisumeet metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT gargsushilkumar metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT pleskowdouglask metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT chuttaniram metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT berzintylerm metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sethinidhi metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy
AT sawhneymandeeps metaanalysisonefficacyandsafetysingleballoonvsdoubleballoonenteroscopy