Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Starting position during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
McKechnie, T; Heimann, L; Kazi, T; Jessani, G; Lee, Y; Sne, N; Hong, D; Eskicioglu, C.
Afiliación
  • McKechnie T; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Healthcare, 50 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4A6, Canada.
  • Heimann L; Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA, USA.
  • Kazi T; Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
  • Jessani G; Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
  • Lee Y; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Healthcare, 50 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4A6, Canada.
  • Sne N; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Healthcare, 50 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4A6, Canada.
  • Hong D; Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
  • Eskicioglu C; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Healthcare, 50 Charlton Avenue East, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4A6, Canada.
Tech Coloproctol ; 28(1): 39, 2024 Mar 20.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38507105
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Traditional teaching has been to place patients in the left lateral decubitus starting position for colonoscopies. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared left lateral decubitus starting position to other approaches. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare different starting positions for colonoscopies and their effect on cecal intubation.

METHODS:

MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to July 2023. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were RCTs comparing at least two different starting positions for adults undergoing colonoscopy. The main outcome was cecal intubation time. Meta-analysis used an inverse variance random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Tool for RCTs 2.0.

RESULTS:

After screening 1523 citations, 14 RCTs were included. Four studies compared left lateral decubitus to right lateral decubitus, four studies compared left lateral decubitus to left lateral tilt-down, three studies compared left lateral decubitus to prone, and three studies compared left lateral decubitus to supine. There were no statistically significant differences in cecal intubation time in seconds across all comparisons left lateral decubitus vs. right lateral decubitus (MD 14.9, 95% CI - 111.8 to 141.6, p = 0.82, I2 = 85%); left lateral decubitus vs. left lateral tilt-down (MD - 31.3, 95% CI - 70.8 to 8.3, p = 0.12, I2 = 82%); left lateral decubitus vs. prone (MD 17.2, 95% CI - 174.9 to 209.4, p = 0.86, I2 = 94%); left lateral decubitus vs. supine (MD - 149.9, 95% CI - 443.6 to 143.9, p = 0.32, I2 = 89%).

CONCLUSION:

The starting position for colonoscopies likely does not influence cecal intubation time. This study was limited by heterogeneity.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ciego / Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Colonoscopía / Posicionamiento del Paciente Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Tech Coloproctol Asunto de la revista: GASTROENTEROLOGIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ciego / Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Colonoscopía / Posicionamiento del Paciente Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Tech Coloproctol Asunto de la revista: GASTROENTEROLOGIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá