Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20927746›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum.

Steven R Brown, Wal Baraza

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02406547 (Randomised Tandem Colonoscopy of Narrow Band Imaging), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02406547 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Randomised Tandem Colonoscopy of Narrow Band Imaging (NBI) and White Light Endoscopy in Patients With Serrated Lesions

TypeinterventionalSponsorParc de Salut MarRan2015 to 2016Enrolled41ConditionsSerrated Polyps, Sessile Serrated Adenoma, Colorectal NeoplasmsArmsNBI, WLE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Management of Rectal Polyps.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016
    Review
  4. Can Technology Improve the Quality of Colonoscopy?Current gastroenterology reports · 2016
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Molecular imaging in gastroenterology.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2013
    Review
  8. Quality colonoscopy and risk of interval cancer in Lynch syndrome.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. New imaging techniques and opportunities in endoscopy.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steven R BrownSurgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Dept Surgery, Northern General Hospital, Herried Road, Sheffield S7, South Yorkshire, UK, S5 7AU.
Wal Baraza
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough conventional colonoscopy is the most sensitive test available for the investigation of the colorectum for polyps, there are data that raise concerns about its sensitivity. Chromoscopy may be one way of enhancing the ability for colonoscopy to detect polyps particularly diminutive flat lesions that may be otherwise difficult to detect.

objectivesTo determine whether the use of chromoscopy enhances detection of polyps and neoplasia during endoscopic examination of the colon and rectum. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases were searched (April 2010) along with a hand search of abstracts from relevant meetings. Search terms included randomised trials containing combinations of the following: 'chromoscopy' 'colonoscopy' 'dye-spray' 'chromo-endoscopy' 'indigo-carmine' 'magnifying endoscopy'. SELECTION CRITERIA: All prospective randomised trials comparing chromoscopic with conventional endoscopic examination of the lower gastrointestinal tract were included. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease or polyposis syndromes were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials and independently extracted data from the included trials. Outcome measures included the detection of polyps (neoplastic and non-neoplastic), the detection of diminutive lesions, the number of patients with multiple neoplastic lesions and the extubation time. MAIN

resultsFive trials were included in this update, and although there were some methodological drawbacks and differences in study design, combining the results showed a significant difference in favour of chromoscopy for all detection outcomes. In particular, chromoscopy is likely to yield significantly more patients with at least one neoplastic lesion (OR 1.67 (CI 1.29-2.15)) and significantly more patients with three or more neoplastic lesions (OR 2.55 (CI 1.49-4.36)). Not surprisingly the withdrawal times were significantly slower for the chromoscopy group. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere appears to be strong evidence that chromoscopy enhances the detection of neoplasia in the colon and rectum. Patients with neoplastic polyps, particularly those with multiple polyps, are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. Such lesions, which presumably would be missed with conventional colonoscopy, could contribute to the interval cancer numbers on any surveillance programme.

Indexed as

Indicators and ReagentsIndigo CarmineColonic PolypsColonoscopyHumansIntestinal PolypsPrecancerous ConditionsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRectal DiseasesIndicators and ReagentsIndigo Carmine

Identifiers

PMID20927746
OpenAlexW4234086207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.