Copyright
©The Author(s) 2019.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 7, 2019; 25(9): 1158-1170
Published online Mar 7, 2019. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i9.1158
Published online Mar 7, 2019. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i9.1158
Author (yr) | Country | Study period | Centres, n | Endoscopists, n | Device | Endoscopes | Patients, n | EAC/CC, n/n | Indication | Female EAC/CC, n (%) | Age EAC/CC, mean ± SD | Screening EAC/CC, n (%) | Bowel Preparation EAC/CC |
Floer et al[15] | Germany | 02.2014-07.2014 | 4 | 10 | Endocuff | HD | 492 | 249/243 | Mixed | 127 (51)/134 (55.1) | 64 ± 3.2/63 ± 3.3 | NR | 11 (1-2)/1 (1-2) [median (IQR)] |
Van Doorn et al[16] | Netherlands | 08.2013-10.2014 | 5 | 20 | Endocuff | HD | 1063 | 530/533 | Mixed | 266 (50.2)/248 (46.5) | 65 ± 2.2/65 ± 2.3 | 201 (37.9)/197 (36.9) | 29 (7-9)/8 (7-9) [median (IQR)] |
Biecker et al[17] | Germany | 02.2013-08.2013 | 2 | 6 | Endocuff | HD | 498 | 245/253 | Mixed | 127 (51.8)/122 (48.2) | 65 ± 3.3/68 ± 3 | NR | 169% good/65% good |
De Palma et al[18] | Italy | 02.2015 -03.2016 | 1 | 4 | Endocuff | HD | 274 | 137/137 | Mixed | 66 (48.2)/65 (47.4) | 55 ± 12.6/55.7 ± 12.3 | 32 (23.4)/29 (21.2) | 7.08 ± 1.06/7.18 ± 0.97 [mean ± SD] |
Bhattacharyya et al[19] | United Kingdom | 09.2014-09.2015 | 1 | 4 | Endocuff Vision | HD | 531 | 266/265 | FOBT (+) screening, surveillance | 104 (39.1)/85 (32.1) | 68 ± 1.2/67 ± 1.2 | 180 (70.7)/186 (69.1) | 3Good/adequate 97.7% /Good adequate 97.7% |
González-Fernández et al[20] | Mexico | 04.2014-11.2015 | 1 | 18 | Endocuff | Mixed | 337 | 174/163 | Screening | 124 (71)/124 (76) | 60 ± 1.8/62 ± 2.5 | 174 (100)/163 (100) | 27 (6-8)/7 (6-8) [median (IQR)] |
Ngu et al[21] | United Kingdom | 11.2014-02.2016 | 7 | 48 | Endocuff Vision | Not reported | 1772 | 888/884 | FOBT (+) screening, surveillance | 381 (42.9)/ 382 (43.2) | 61.7 ± 11.7/62.1 ± 11.1 | 274 (30.9)/282 (32) | NR |
Wada et al[22] | Japan | 04.2015-09.2015 | 1 | 1 | Endocuff | HD | 477 | 239/238 | Mixed | 117 (48.9)/123 (51.7) | 61.2 ± 3.3/62.2 ± 3.3 | 89 (37.2)/74 (31.1) | 27.91 ± 0.94/7.88 ± 1.03 [mean ± SD] |
Rex et al[23] | United States, Italy | NR | 3 | 3 | Endocuff | HD | 594 | 299/295 | Mixed | 141 (47) /141 (47) | 63.2 ± 8.2/62.6 ± 8.3 | 126 (42)/127 (43) | 28.12 ± 1.33 overall, no differences between the 2 groups |
- Citation: Triantafyllou K, Gkolfakis P, Tziatzios G, Papanikolaou IS, Fuccio L, Hassan C. Effect of Endocuff use on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25(9): 1158-1170
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v25/i9/1158.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i9.1158