Cargando…

Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy requires the intubation of the cecum for screening of colorectal diseases. The conventional position used for colonoscopy is the left lateral position (LLP). However, alternative positions have also been utilized to enhance the success of intubation. Thus, the aim of this stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Snow Yunni, Yaow, Clyve Yu Leon, Ng, Cheng Han, Wong, Neng Wei, Tham, Hui Yu, Chong, Choon Seng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Chinese Medical Association 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8110879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34013177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdtm.2020.09.002
_version_ 1783690383313600512
author Lin, Snow Yunni
Yaow, Clyve Yu Leon
Ng, Cheng Han
Wong, Neng Wei
Tham, Hui Yu
Chong, Choon Seng
author_facet Lin, Snow Yunni
Yaow, Clyve Yu Leon
Ng, Cheng Han
Wong, Neng Wei
Tham, Hui Yu
Chong, Choon Seng
author_sort Lin, Snow Yunni
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy requires the intubation of the cecum for screening of colorectal diseases. The conventional position used for colonoscopy is the left lateral position (LLP). However, alternative positions have also been utilized to enhance the success of intubation. Thus, the aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the different positions to determine the effectiveness of the individual positions for successful colonoscopy. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Cochrane trials electronic databases were searched for studies on colonoscopy positions. The primary outcome was defined as the cecal intubation rate. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the rates of cecal intubation were estimated. Secondary outcomes such as the cecal intubation time and adenoma detection rate were further analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: After reviewing 644 identified records, 7 randomized control trials (RCT) studies were included. No significant difference was observed in either comparisons, between the LLP vs. supine position (SP) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.04, P = 0.55) or the LLP vs. prone position (PP) (RR = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.06, P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Amidst available literature, the use of other positions can be considered when performing colonoscopy. These further highlights that the existential practice is based predominantly on familiarity instead of evidence-based-research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8110879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Chinese Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81108792021-05-18 Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials Lin, Snow Yunni Yaow, Clyve Yu Leon Ng, Cheng Han Wong, Neng Wei Tham, Hui Yu Chong, Choon Seng Chronic Dis Transl Med Meta Analysis BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy requires the intubation of the cecum for screening of colorectal diseases. The conventional position used for colonoscopy is the left lateral position (LLP). However, alternative positions have also been utilized to enhance the success of intubation. Thus, the aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the different positions to determine the effectiveness of the individual positions for successful colonoscopy. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Cochrane trials electronic databases were searched for studies on colonoscopy positions. The primary outcome was defined as the cecal intubation rate. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the rates of cecal intubation were estimated. Secondary outcomes such as the cecal intubation time and adenoma detection rate were further analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: After reviewing 644 identified records, 7 randomized control trials (RCT) studies were included. No significant difference was observed in either comparisons, between the LLP vs. supine position (SP) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.04, P = 0.55) or the LLP vs. prone position (PP) (RR = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.06, P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Amidst available literature, the use of other positions can be considered when performing colonoscopy. These further highlights that the existential practice is based predominantly on familiarity instead of evidence-based-research. Chinese Medical Association 2020-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8110879/ /pubmed/34013177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdtm.2020.09.002 Text en © 2020 Chinese Medical Association. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Meta Analysis
Lin, Snow Yunni
Yaow, Clyve Yu Leon
Ng, Cheng Han
Wong, Neng Wei
Tham, Hui Yu
Chong, Choon Seng
Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title_full Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title_fullStr Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title_full_unstemmed Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title_short Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
title_sort different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
topic Meta Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8110879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34013177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cdtm.2020.09.002
work_keys_str_mv AT linsnowyunni differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
AT yaowclyveyuleon differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
AT ngchenghan differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
AT wongnengwei differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
AT thamhuiyu differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
AT chongchoonseng differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials