Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29572630›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2018

Effect of premedication on lesion detection rate and visualization of the mucosa during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a multicenter large sample randomized controlled double-blind study.

X Liu, C T Guan, L Y Xue, S He, Y M Zhang, D L Zhao, Y Li, F G Liu, J Li, Y F Liu and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. The effect of using simethicone with or without N-acetylcysteine before gastroscopy: A meta-analysis and systemic review.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Quality indicators in diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2020
    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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

X LiuDepartment of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China.
C T GuanDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China.
L Y XueDepartment of Pathology, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
S HeDepartment of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China.
Y M ZhangDepartment of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China.
D L ZhaoDepartment of Cancer Prevention and Treatment Center, People's Hospital, Feicheng, 271600, China.
Y LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, People's Hospital, Linqu, 262600, China.
F G LiuDepartment of General Internal Medicine, People's Hospital, Dongping, 271500, China.
J LiDepartment of Cancer Early Detection and Treatment, Cancer Hospital, Yanting, 621600, China.
Y F LiuDepartment of Endoscopy, People's Hospital, Hebi, 458030, China.
A S LingDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First People's Hospital, Anqing, 246003, China.
W Q WeiDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China. weiwq@cicams.ac.cn.
G Q WangDepartment of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 17 Panjiayuan, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China. wangguiq@126.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4544-6949
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNFirst People's Hospital of Chongqing · CNWenzhou Medical University · CNZoucheng People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPremedication in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for higher lesions detection rate has not been well studied so far. This study aimed to confirm whether premedication could improve the detection rate of early cancer or precancerous lesions and mucosal visibility.

methodFrom July 2015 to December 2015, 7200 participants from 6 centers were screened by endoscopy with one of the 4 following premedications randomly: (1) water (group D); (2) pronase (group A); (3) simethicone (group B); (4) pronase and simethicone (group C). Early cancer and precancerous lesions detection rates were taken as the primary endpoints, and mucosal visibility was taken as the secondary endpoint. They were compared among four groups to determine different premedication effects in terms of different anatomical sites. Trial was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; the registration number is ChiCTR-IOR-17010985.

resultsThe upper gastrointestinal overall precancerous lesion detection rates among four groups were 8.7, 8.4, 10.0, and 10.3%, the overall early cancer detection rates were 1.3, 1.4%, 1.5, and 1.6%, both without significant difference (p = 0.138 and 0.878). However, the visibility score distributions between control group (D) and premedication groups (A, B, and C) were all statistically significant, with all anatomical sites p values < 0.001. Subgroup analyses, from 2 centers without screening before, also showed significant difference in esophageal (3.9, 3.3, 4.5, and 8.4% with p = 0.004) and overall (7.0, 5.5, 7.3, and 12.0% with p = 0.004) precancerous lesion detection rate.

conclusionsPremedication with pronase and simethicone may not increase lesion detection rates but could significantly increase the upper gastrointestinal mucosal visibility.

Indexed as

Endoscopy, GastrointestinalAdultAgedAntifoaming AgentsDouble-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleDrug Therapy, CombinationEarly Detection of CancerExpectorantsFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMucous MembranePrecancerous ConditionsAntifoaming AgentsExpectorantsPronaseSimethiconeLesion detection ratePremedicationPronaseSimethiconeVisualization

Identifiers

PMID29572630
PMCPMC6061056
OpenAlexW2793863968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.