SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Water infusion versus air insufflation for colonoscopy.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.
- EFFICACY OF WATER INFUSION VERSUS AIR/CO2 INSUFFLATION FOR COLONOSCOPY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.Arquivos de gastroenterologia · 2026Pooled it
- Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Assessing water-assisted colonoscopy in beginner endoscopists: a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Trial
- Impact of an Abdominal Compression Bandage on the Completion of Colonoscopy for Obese Adults: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022Trial
- A randomized controlled trial comparing right and left lateral decubitus starting position on outcomes in colonoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Trial
- Feasibility and outcomes of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for ≥ 10 mm colorectal polyps.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Trial
- Water-assisted colonoscopy in inflammatory bowel diseases: From technical implications to diagnostic and therapeutic potentials.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Review
- Water exchange technique improves colonoscopy in patients with spinal cord injury: Results of a matched cohort study.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- JAG consensus statements for training and certification in colonoscopy.Frontline gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in gastroenterology: Where are we heading?Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Colonoscopy skills improvement training improves patient comfort during colonoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Screening colonoscopy: The present and the future.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Efficacy and safety of the starting position during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2020Review
- Frontiers of Robotic Colonoscopy: A Comprehensive Review of Robotic Colonoscopes and Technologies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Practice recommendations for the use of sedation in routine hospital-based colonoscopy.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Article
- The WASh Trial: water-assisted sigmoidoscopy in the English Bowel Scope Screening Programme: study protocol for a randomized multicenter trial.Endoscopy international open · 2019Article
- My approach to water-assisted colonoscopy.Frontline gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Does Increased Adenoma Detection Reduce the Risk of Colorectal Cancer, and How Good Do We Need to Be?Current gastroenterology reports · 2019Review
- Recent advances in colonoscopy.F1000Research · 2019Review
- Is water exchange superior to water immersion in detecting adenomas during colonoscopies? Results from a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColonoscopy is a widely used diagnostic and therapeutic modality. A large proportion of the population is likely to undergo colonoscopy for diagnosis and treatment of colorectal diseases, or when participating in colorectal cancer screening programs. To reduce pain, water infusion instead of traditional air insufflation during the insertion phase of the colonoscopy has been proposed, thereby improving patients' acceptance of the procedure. Moreover, the water infusion method may improve early detection of precancerous neoplasms.
objectivesTo compare water infusion techniques with standard air insufflation, specifically evaluating technical quality and screening efficacy, as well as patients' acceptance of the water infusion procedure. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialized Register (February 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to February 2014), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to February 2014), and ClinicalTrials.gov (1999 to February 2014) for eligible randomised controlled trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing water infusion (water exchange or water immersion methods) against standard air insufflation during the insertion phase of the colonoscopy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and extracted data from eligible studies. We performed analysis using Review Manager software (RevMan 5). MAIN
resultsWe included 16 randomised controlled trials consisting of 2933 colonoscopies. Primary outcome measures were cecal intubation rate and adenoma detection; secondary outcomes were time needed to reach the cecum, pain experienced by participants during the procedure, completion of cecal intubation without sedation/analgesia, and adverse events. Completeness of colonoscopy, that is cecal intubation rate, was similar between water infusion and standard air insufflation (risk ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.03, P = 0.93). Adenoma detection rate, that is number of participants with at least one detected adenoma, was slightly improved with water infusion (risk ratio 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.30, P = 0.007). Assuming the fraction of patients undergoing screening colonoscopy who had one or more adenomas detected was 20 per 100 with standard colonoscopy, the use of water colonoscopy may increase the fraction to 23 per 100 individuals. From our findings, it is possible that up to 68,000 more of the 1.7 million outpatient screening colonoscopies performed annually in the United States, could detect adenomas if water infusion colonoscopy was used. In addition, with water infusion participants experienced significantly less pain (mean difference in pain score on a 0 to 10 scale: -1.57, 95% CI -2.00 to -1.14, P < 0.00001) and a significantly lower proportion of participants requested on-demand sedation or analgesia, or both (risk ratio 1.20, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.27, P < 0.00001). Qualitative analysis suggests that water infusion colonoscopy was not associated with a markedly increased rate of adverse events compared with the standard procedure. AUTHORS'
conclusionsCompleteness of colonoscopy, that is cecal intubation rate, was not improved by water infusion compared with standard air insufflation colonoscopy. However, adenoma detection, assessed with two different measures (that is adenoma detection rate and number of detected adenomas per procedure), was slightly augmented by the water infusion colonoscopy. Improved adenoma detection might be due to the cleansing effects of water infusions on the mucosa. Detection of premalignant lesions during standard colonoscopy is suboptimal, and so improvements in adenoma detection by water infusion colonoscopy, although small, may help to reduce the risk of interval colorectal carcinoma. The most obvious benefit of water infusion colonoscopy was reduction of procedure-related abdominal pain, which may enhance the acceptance of screening/surveillance colonoscopy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.