Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact Login    Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
Users Online: 700 


 
Table of Contents   
LETTER TO THE EDITOR  
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 25  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 205
Water exchange versus air insufflation for colonoscopy: Methodological issues of the meta-analysis are a cause for concern


Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Tianjin Gong An Hospital, Tianjin, China

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication29-Apr-2019
 

How to cite this article:
Zhang K. Water exchange versus air insufflation for colonoscopy: Methodological issues of the meta-analysis are a cause for concern. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2019;25:205

How to cite this URL:
Zhang K. Water exchange versus air insufflation for colonoscopy: Methodological issues of the meta-analysis are a cause for concern. Saudi J Gastroenterol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 18];25:205. Available from: http://www.saudijgastro.com/text.asp?2019/25/3/205/257323




Sir,

I read with interest the meta-analysis published recently in SJG by Liu et al.[1] who concluded that the water exchange method could significantly increase ADR/PDR and improve patients' acceptance of colonoscopy, while reducing the degree of pain and minimize the need for on-demand sedation and adjunct maneuvers. However, there are some issues that require comment.

First, the search strategy adopted in the study is questionable. According to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions,[2] the search strategy of Medline database includes MeSH terms and free-text terms. However, we do not find this search strategy applied in this study. This may lead to incomplete retrieval of the literature. Moreover, the search strategy should be mentioned without any limitation of publication language.

Secondly, methodological quality of the included RCTs were not high, although the article mentions that blinding of the endoscopist could not be carried out in clinical practice, but the random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants, and outcome assessment in some included trials were uncertain, and hence the adequacy of the methodological quality of the included studies cannot be evaluated. The risk of bias in the included literature has been more comprehensively elucidated in a similar meta-analysis addressing this clinical issue.[3] The authors point to the several methodological confounders including difference in inclusion and exclusion criteria, characteristics of patient cohorts, lack of assessor blinding, sedation model and colonoscopy skill level, potentially accounting for the differences recorded across subgroups of trials.

Based on the above issues, the conclusion of this article should be interpreted with caution, and more rigorously designed RCTs are warranted to confirm the current findings.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Liu Y, Huang QK, Dong XL, Jin PP. Water exchange versus air insufflation for colonoscopy: A meta-analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2018;24:311-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
2.
Higgins JP. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from: http://www.cochrane.handbook.org. [Last accessed on 2011 March].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Chen Z, Li Z, Yu X, Wang G. Is water exchange superior to water immersion for colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2018;24:259-67.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  

Top
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Kai Zhang
Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Tianjin Gong An Hospital, No. 78 Nanjing Road, Heping District, Tianjin, 300042
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_42_19

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
  
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed167    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded45    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal