Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26185393›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Intraprocedural bowel cleansing with the JetPrep cleansing system improves adenoma detection.

Arthur Hoffman, Sanjay Murthy, Lena Pompetzki, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Achim Tresch, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of ultra-low volume (≤1 L) bowel preparation fluids: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Flexible Gastro-intestinal Endoscopy - Clinical Challenges and Technical Achievements.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Arthur HoffmanArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Sanjay MurthyArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Lena PompetzkiArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Johannes Wilhelm ReyArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Martin GoetzArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Achim TreschArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Peter Robert GalleArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
Ralf KiesslichArthur Hoffman, Johannes Wilhelm Rey, Martin Goetz, Peter Robert Galle, Ralf Kiesslich, First Department of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, 65199 Wiesbaden, Germany.
University of Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate the impact of JetPrep cleansing on adenoma detection rates.

methodsIn this prospective, randomized, crossover trial, patients were blindly randomized to an intervention arm or a control arm. In accordance with the risk profile for the development of colorectal carcinoma, the study participants were divided into high-risk and low-risk groups. Individuals with just one criterion (age > 70 years, adenoma in medical history, and first-degree relative with colorectal cancer) were regarded as high-risk patients. Bowel preparation was performed in a standardized manner one day before the procedure. Participants in the intervention arm underwent an initial colonoscopy with standard bowel cleansing using a 250-mL syringe followed by a second colonoscopy that included irrigation by the use of the JetPrep cleansing system. The reverse sequence was used in the control arm. The study participants were divided into a high-risk group and a low-risk group according to their respective risk profiles for the development of colorectal carcinoma.

resultsA total of 64 patients (34 men and 30 women) were included in the study; 22 were included in the high-risk group. After randomization, 30 patients were assigned to the control group (group A) and 34 to the intervention group (group B). The average Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score was 5.15 ± 2.04. The withdrawal time needed for the first step was significantly longer in group A using the JetPrep system (9.41 ± 3.34 min) compared to group B (7.5 ± 1.92 min). A total of 163 polyps were discovered in 64 study participants who underwent both investigation steps. In group A, 49.4% of the polyps were detected during the step of standard bowel cleansing while the miss rate constituted 50.7%. Group B underwent cleansing with the JetPrep system during the first examination step, and as many as 73.9% of polyps were identified during this step. Thus, the miss rate in group B was a mere 26.1% (P < 0.001). When considering only the right side of the colon, the miss rate in group A during the first examination was 60.6%, in contrast to a miss rate of 26.4% in group B (P < 0.001).

conclusionJetPrep is recommended for use during colonoscopy because a better prepared bowel enables a better adenoma detection, particularly in the proximal colon.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyAdenomaAdenomatous PolypsAgedColonic PolypsColorectal NeoplasmsCross-Over StudiesDiagnostic ErrorsEarly Detection of CancerEquipment DesignFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisAdenoma detection rateAdenoma miss rateBoston Bowel Preparation ScaleColon preparationFlat adenomaInterval cancerRight sided colon

Identifiers

PMID26185393
PMCPMC4499364
OpenAlexW2418953559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.