GOAL This meta-analysis aims to compare the sessile-serrated adenoma detection rate (SSADR) of currently available mechanical new technology devices (NTDs) to conventional colonoscopy (CC). BACKGROUND NTDs including Endocuff, EndoRing, G-Eye,… Click to show full abstract
GOAL This meta-analysis aims to compare the sessile-serrated adenoma detection rate (SSADR) of currently available mechanical new technology devices (NTDs) to conventional colonoscopy (CC). BACKGROUND NTDs including Endocuff, EndoRing, G-Eye, and AmplifEYE were developed with the aim of improving adenoma detection rate by enhancing colonic mucosal visualization. Increasing awareness of the risk of sessile-serrated adenoma progression to malignancy has ushered a need to increase the detection of these characteristically flat lesions. STUDY Embase and PubMed/Medline databases were searched from inception through January 2019 for published manuscripts or major conference abstracts reporting SSADR with Endocuff, EndoRing, G-Eye, AmplifEYE, and CC. Randomized controlled trials, high-quality case-control, cohort, and observational studies in adults with >10 subjects were included. The primary outcome was pooled SSADR odds ratio (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) comparing CC with the NTDs. In addition, an analysis comparing each device to CC was performed. RESULTS Of 207 citations identified, a total of 14 studies with 12,655 subjects were included in our analysis (5931 subjects with NTDs and 6724 with CC). There were 12 studies with Endocuff, 2 with EndoRing, 1 with G-EYE, and 1 with AmplifEYE. The mean age was 62.4 years and 57.5% were males. Pooled SSADR with NTDs was 12.3% as compared with 6.4% with CC, with an OR of 1.81 (95% CI: 1.6-2.0, I: 77%). Analysis of Endocuff alone yielded an OR 1.81 (95% CI: 1.6-2.1, I: 79%). CONCLUSION Mechanical NTDs, notably Endocuff, are a safe and effective tool to increase the SSADR.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.