Comparison of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy. Methods: We searched OVID-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the procedural sequences in same-day bidirectional endoscopy, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. The sedative and analgesic doses required, discomfort and satisfaction scores, procedure time, recovery time, adenoma detection rate, and failed cecal intubation were evaluated. Adverse effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular complications, were also assessed. Results: We included six studies, with 1,848 patients in total. The requirement for sedative treatment was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (standardized mean difference [SMD], –0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.54 to –0.24; p = 0.12; I2 = 49%). Discomfort, scored by patients during the EGD procedure, was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, –0.45; 95% CI, –0.80 to –0.09; p = 0.02; I2 = 73%), while it was comparable during colonoscopy between the two sequences. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, –0.47; 95% CI, –0.65 to –0.30; p = 0.28; I2 = 21%). Total procedure duration, EGD, colonoscopy, cecal intubation time and incidence, incidences of pathologic findings, and adenoma detection were comparable between the two sequences. There was no significant difference in the incidences of desaturation, hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, and tachycardia between the two sequences. Conclusions: When conducting same-day bidirectional endoscopy, EGD followed by colonoscopy is the most beneficial sequence to be used because patients require lower sedative doses, recover faster, and report lesser discomfort.
Abstract
Background/Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy. Methods: We searched OVID-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the procedural sequences in same-day bidirectional endoscopy, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. The sedative and analgesic doses required, discomfort and satisfaction scores, procedure time, recovery time, adenoma detection rate, and failed cecal intubation were evaluated. Adverse effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular complications, were also assessed. Results: We included six studies, with 1,848 patients in total. The requirement for sedative treatment was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (standardized mean difference [SMD], –0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.54 to –0.24; p = 0.12; I2 = 49%). Discomfort, scored by patients during the EGD procedure, was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, –0.45; 95% CI, –0.80 to –0.09; p = 0.02; I2 = 73%), while it was comparable during colonoscopy between the two sequences. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, –0.47; 95% CI, –0.65 to –0.30; p = 0.28; I2 = 21%). Total procedure duration, EGD, colonoscopy, cecal intubation time and incidence, incidences of pathologic findings, and adenoma detection were comparable between the two sequences. There was no significant difference in the incidences of desaturation, hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, and tachycardia between the two sequences. Conclusions: When conducting same-day bidirectional endoscopy, EGD followed by colonoscopy is the most beneficial sequence to be used because patients require lower sedative doses, recover faster, and report lesser discomfort.
참고문헌 (21)
- Urquhart J, "A closer look at same-day bidirectional endoscopy", Gastrointest Endosc, 69, pp.271~277 (2009)
- Carter D, "Comparison of procedural sequence in same-day consecutive bidirectional endoscopy using moderate sedation: a prospective randomized study", J Clin Gastroenterol, 48, pp.236~240 (2014)
- Choi JS, "Which should go first during same-day upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy?:a randomized prospective study focusing on colonoscopy performance", Surg Endosc, 27, pp.2209~2215 (2013)
- Cao Y, "Comparison of procedural sequences in same-day painless bidirectional endoscopy : single-center, prospective, randomized study", Dig Endosc, 29, pp.330~337 (2017)
- Chen SW, "Optimal procedural sequence for same-day bidirectional endoscopy with moderate sedation : a prospective randomized study", J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 33, pp.689~695 (2018)
- Cho JH, "Comparison of procedural sequences in same-day bidirectional endoscopy without benzodiazepine and propofol sedation:starting at the bottom or the top", J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 25, pp.899~904 (2010)
- Hsieh YH, "Which should go first during same-day bidirectional endosocopy with propofol sedation", J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 26, pp.1559~1564 (2011)
- Tang JH, "Paired comparison of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy with moderate sedation and carbon dioxide insufflation: a prospective observational study", Saudi J Gastroenterol, 22, pp.360~365 (2016)
- Lin JA, "Procedural sequence of bidirectional gastrointestinal endoscopy from the anaesthesiologist’s viewpoint", Br J Anaesth, 113(eLetters Suppl), pp.el11898~ (2014)
- Higgins JPT, "Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0" (2011), Cochrane Collaboration
- Liberati A, "The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions : explanation and elaboration", J Clin Epidemiol, 62, pp.e1~e34 (2009)
- Hozo SP, "Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample", BMC Med Res Methodol, 5, pp.13~ (2005)
- Higgins JPT, "A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 10(Suppl 1), pp.29~31 (2016)
- Higgins JP, "Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses", BMJ, 327, pp.557~560 (2003)
- IntHout J, "The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis is straightforward and considerably outperforms the standard DerSimonian-Laird method", BMC Med Res Methodol, 14, pp.25~ (2014)
- Naing C, "Reporting ‘number needed to treat’ in meta-analyses : a cross-sectional study", J Evid Based Med, 5, pp.232~237 (2012)
- Oner OZ, "Prior esophagogastroduodenoscopy does not affect the cecal intubation time at bidirectional endoscopies", Int J Clin Exp Med, 6, pp.599~602 (2013)
- Lucendo AJ, "Sameday bidirectional endoscopy with nonanesthesiologist administration of propofol: safety and cost-effectiveness compared with separated exams", Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 26, pp.301~308 (2014)
- Kurien M, "Same day bidirectional endoscopy : does the procedural order matter", J Gastrointestin Liver Dis, 21, pp.328~ (2012)
- Kazama T, "Optimal propofol plasma concentration during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in young, middle-aged, and elderly patients", Anesthesiology, 93, pp.662~669 (2000)
- Hohl CM, "A cost-effectiveness analysis of propofol versus midazolam for procedural sedation in the emergency department", Acad Emerg Med, 15, pp.32~39 (2008)