Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33042339›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental pathology2020

Comparison of application value between conventional air insufflation and water infusion in colonoscopy.

Li'an Ma, Jifu Yan, Junquan Shen, Jianzhong Sang, Huanjun Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and experimental pathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

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. Article
  2. Efficacy of water infusion combined with defoamers in colonoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Article
  3. Assessment of pain between sedated and unsedated colonoscopy: Double-blind randomized clinical trail.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2021
    Article
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

5 authors.

Li'an MaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Yuyao People's Hospital Yuyao, Zhejiang Province, China.
Jifu YanDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Yuyao People's Hospital Yuyao, Zhejiang Province, China.
Junquan ShenDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Yuyao People's Hospital Yuyao, Zhejiang Province, China.
Jianzhong SangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Yuyao People's Hospital Yuyao, Zhejiang Province, China.
Huanjun XuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Yuyao People's Hospital Yuyao, Zhejiang Province, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo discuss the feasibility of water infusion colonoscopy and its difference with traditional air insufflation colonoscopy in application value.

methodsA prospective randomized controlled clinical study was designed to include 200 patients who underwent sedation-free diagnostic colonoscopy. Among them, 100 patients were treated with water infusion colonoscopy (observation group) and 100 patients were treated with air insufflation colonoscopy (control group). All operations were performed independently by the same experienced physician. The differences in colonoscopy related values, colon adenoma detection rate, and follow-up findings between the patients of two groups were compared.

resultsThere was no significant difference in the Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) score of the left hemicolon, transverse colon, right hemicolon, total BBPS scores, and bubble amount between the two groups (P>0.05). In the observation group, the scope-forward time, the time to reach the ileocecal junction, and the total operation time were significantly longer than that of the control group (P<0.01). The proportion of patients in whom the ileocecal junction was successfully reached was significantly higher in the observation group. The intraoperative abdominal pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, abdominal distension VAS score, the proportion of postural change, and the proportion of abdominal compression were all significantly lower in the observation group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the endoscope hardness adjustment rate, the scope withdrawal time, total detection rate of adenomas, and the size or location of colon adenomatous lesions between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared with control group, the incidence of abdominal pain and VAS scores were significantly lower in the observation group (P<0.05), and the willingness of patients to perform colonoscopy again was significantly higher (P<0.01).

conclusionPatients' tolerance and examination satisfaction are significantly better when using water infusion colonoscopy compared with traditional air insufflation colonoscopy, but the operation times are longer.

Indexed as

abdominal painair insufflation colonoscopyapplication valuecolon adenomaWater infusion colonoscopy

Identifiers

PMID33042339
PMCPMC7539865

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.