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

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Snow Yunni Lin, Clyve Yu Leon Yaow, Cheng Han Ng, Neng Wei Wong, Hui Yu Tham, Choon Seng Chong
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. 2021
Materias:	Colonoscopy Endoscopy Meta analysis Patient positioning Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3b81c007314c4f9dbf105f9b515ff8d6
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3b81c007314c4f9dbf105f9b515ff8d6
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3b81c007314c4f9dbf105f9b515ff8d62021-12-02T16:29:18ZDifferent position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials2095-882X10.1016/j.cdtm.2020.09.002https://doaj.org/article/3b81c007314c4f9dbf105f9b515ff8d62021-03-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095882X20300803https://doaj.org/toc/2095-882XBackground: 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.Snow Yunni LinClyve Yu Leon YaowCheng Han NgNeng Wei WongHui Yu ThamChoon Seng ChongKeAi Communications Co., Ltd.articleColonoscopyEndoscopyMeta analysisPatient positioningMedicine (General)R5-920ENChronic Diseases and Translational Medicine, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 27-34 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Colonoscopy Endoscopy Meta analysis Patient positioning Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	Colonoscopy Endoscopy Meta analysis Patient positioning Medicine (General) R5-920 Snow Yunni Lin Clyve Yu Leon Yaow Cheng Han Ng Neng Wei Wong Hui Yu Tham Choon Seng Chong Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
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	article
author	Snow Yunni Lin Clyve Yu Leon Yaow Cheng Han Ng Neng Wei Wong Hui Yu Tham Choon Seng Chong
author_facet	Snow Yunni Lin Clyve Yu Leon Yaow Cheng Han Ng Neng Wei Wong Hui Yu Tham Choon Seng Chong
author_sort	Snow Yunni Lin
title	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_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_sort	different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials
publisher	KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/3b81c007314c4f9dbf105f9b515ff8d6
work_keys_str_mv	AT snowyunnilin differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials AT clyveyuleonyaow differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials AT chenghanng differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials AT nengweiwong differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials AT huiyutham differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials AT choonsengchong differentpositionfromtraditionalleftlateralforcolonoscopyametaanalysisandsystematicreviewofrandomizedcontroltrials
_version_	1718383923771211776

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

Ejemplares similares