Cargando…

Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Bowel Preparation on Adenoma Detection: Early Adenomas Affected Stronger than Advanced Adenomas

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Low-quality bowel preparation reduces efficacy of colonoscopy. We aimed to summarize effects of bowel preparation on detection of adenomas, advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed regarding detection of colonic lesions after...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sulz, Michael C., Kröger, Arne, Prakash, Meher, Manser, Christine N., Heinrich, Henriette, Misselwitz, Benjamin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4892520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27257916
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154149
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Low-quality bowel preparation reduces efficacy of colonoscopy. We aimed to summarize effects of bowel preparation on detection of adenomas, advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed regarding detection of colonic lesions after normal and low-quality bowel preparation. Reported bowel preparation quality was transformed to the Aronchick scale with its qualities “excellent”, “good”, “fair”, “poor”, and “insufficient” or “optimal” (good/excellent), “suboptimal” (fair/poor/insufficient), “adequate” (good/excellent/fair) and “inadequate” (poor/insufficient). We identified two types of studies: i) Comparative studies, directly comparing lesion detection according to bowel preparation quality, and ii) repeat colonoscopy studies, reporting results of a second colonoscopy after previous low-quality preparation. RESULTS: The detection of early adenomas was reduced with inadequate vs. adequate bowel preparation (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.53, CI: 0.46–0.62, p<0.001). The advanced adenomas were affected less in comparison (0.74, CI: 0.62–0.87, p<0.001). The large number of subjects considered in the present meta-analysis resulted in smaller confidence intervals compared to earlier studies. Classifying the bowel-preparation quality as suboptimal vs. optimal led to the same qualitative conclusion (OR: 0.81, CI: 0.74–0.89, p<0.001 for early adenomas, OR: 0.94, CI: 0.87–1.01, n.s. for advanced adenomas). Bowel preparation was equally important for right-sided/ flat/ serrated vs. other lesions in most observational studies but more relevant in some repeat colonoscopy studies; data regarding carcinoma detection were insufficient. CONCLUSION: Inadequate bowel preparation affects detection of early colonic lesions stronger than advanced lesions.