Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33317225›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2021

Impact of Moderate versus Deep Sedation and Trainee Participation on Adenoma Detection Rate-Analysis of a Veteran Population.

Hemnishil K Marella, Nasir Saleem, Claudio Tombazzi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hemnishil K MarellaDepartment of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Nasir SaleemDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Claudio TombazziDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
University of Tennessee Health Science Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe adenoma detection rate (ADR) is used as a quality indicator for screening and surveillance colonoscopy. The study aimed to determine if moderate versus deep sedation affects the outcomes of the ADR and other quality metrics in the veteran population.

methodsA retrospective review of colonoscopies performed at Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center over a one-year period was conducted. A total of 900 colonoscopy reports were reviewed. After exclusion criteria, a total of 229 index, average-risk screening colonoscopies were identified. Data were collected to determine the impact of moderate (benzodiazepine plus opioids) versus deep (propofol) sedation on the ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), and withdrawal time.

resultsAmong 229 screening colonoscopies, 103 (44.9%) used moderate sedation while 126 (55%) were done under deep sedation. The ADR and PDR were not significantly different between moderate versus deep sedation at 35.9% vs. 37.3% (p=0.82) and 58.2% vs. 48.4% (p=0.13), respectively. Similarly, there was no significant difference in withdrawal time between moderate and deep sedation (13.4 min vs. 14 min, p=0.56) during screening colonoscopies.

conclusionIn veterans undergoing index, average-risk screening colonoscopies, the quality metrics of the ADR, PDR, and withdrawal time are not influenced by deep sedation compared with moderate sedation.

Indexed as

Adenoma detection rateDeep sedationModerate sedationPolyp detection rate

Identifiers

PMID33317225
PMCPMC8039744
OpenAlexW3112201258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.