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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |