Systematic meta-review: diagnostic accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy for colonic neoplasia with umbrella meta-analysis.

IF 2.4 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Pub Date : 2025-08-30 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26317745251370845
Ian Io Lei, Pablo Cortegoso Valdivia, Wojciech Marlicz, Karolina Skonieczna-Żydecka, Ramesh Arasaradnam, Rami Eliakim, Anastasios Koulaouzidis
{"title":"Systematic meta-review: diagnostic accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy for colonic neoplasia with umbrella meta-analysis.","authors":"Ian Io Lei, Pablo Cortegoso Valdivia, Wojciech Marlicz, Karolina Skonieczna-Żydecka, Ramesh Arasaradnam, Rami Eliakim, Anastasios Koulaouzidis","doi":"10.1177/26317745251370845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is rising globally, intensifying pressure on endoscopy services. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) offers a non-invasive alternative. Despite several systematic reviews showing reasonable polyp detection rates, clinical scepticism remains.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This meta-review and umbrella meta-analysis aim to synthesise evidence on CCE's diagnostic accuracy in polyp and CRC detection, using CT colonography or colonoscopy as the reference standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed for systematic reviews evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CCE in detecting polyps and CRC. A qualitative thematic review and synthesis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A bivariate generalised linear mixed model with random effects was used for pooled diagnostic accuracy estimates, and meta-regression was performed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine systematic reviews encompassing 28 unique studies (3472 participants) were included. For polyps of any size, the pooled per-patient sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.69-0.86), specificity was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.81. For polyps ⩾6 mm, sensitivity and specificity were 0.80 and 0.87 (AUC 0.81), and for polyps ⩾10 mm, 0.88 and 0.95 (AUC 0.95), respectively. Second-generation CCE (CCE2) improved diagnostic accuracy across all polyp sizes. For polyps of any size, CCE2 achieved a sensitivity of 0.90, specificity of 0.81 and AUC of 0.82. For polyps ⩾ 6 mm and ⩾10 mm, AUCs were 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. CCE2 showed high sensitivity for detecting any polyp size and polyps ⩾6 mm, with low heterogeneity (<i>p</i> > 0.05, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> < 25%). CRC detection sensitivity was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.73-1.00) after excluding cases where the capsule failed to reach the rectum due to battery exhaustion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CCE2 has high diagnostic accuracy for polyps and colorectal cancer detection. While technical challenges persist, CCE2 shows promise as a complementary diagnostic tool to help address the increasing demands for endoscopy services.</p>","PeriodicalId":40947,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":"18 ","pages":"26317745251370845"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12398663/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26317745251370845","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is rising globally, intensifying pressure on endoscopy services. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) offers a non-invasive alternative. Despite several systematic reviews showing reasonable polyp detection rates, clinical scepticism remains.

Objectives: This meta-review and umbrella meta-analysis aim to synthesise evidence on CCE's diagnostic accuracy in polyp and CRC detection, using CT colonography or colonoscopy as the reference standard.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed for systematic reviews evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CCE in detecting polyps and CRC. A qualitative thematic review and synthesis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A bivariate generalised linear mixed model with random effects was used for pooled diagnostic accuracy estimates, and meta-regression was performed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation.

Results: Nine systematic reviews encompassing 28 unique studies (3472 participants) were included. For polyps of any size, the pooled per-patient sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.69-0.86), specificity was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.81. For polyps ⩾6 mm, sensitivity and specificity were 0.80 and 0.87 (AUC 0.81), and for polyps ⩾10 mm, 0.88 and 0.95 (AUC 0.95), respectively. Second-generation CCE (CCE2) improved diagnostic accuracy across all polyp sizes. For polyps of any size, CCE2 achieved a sensitivity of 0.90, specificity of 0.81 and AUC of 0.82. For polyps ⩾ 6 mm and ⩾10 mm, AUCs were 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. CCE2 showed high sensitivity for detecting any polyp size and polyps ⩾6 mm, with low heterogeneity (p > 0.05, I 2 < 25%). CRC detection sensitivity was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.73-1.00) after excluding cases where the capsule failed to reach the rectum due to battery exhaustion.

Conclusion: CCE2 has high diagnostic accuracy for polyps and colorectal cancer detection. While technical challenges persist, CCE2 shows promise as a complementary diagnostic tool to help address the increasing demands for endoscopy services.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

系统荟萃分析:结肠胶囊内镜对结肠肿瘤的诊断准确性。
背景:结直肠癌(CRC)的发病率在全球范围内上升,加大了内窥镜检查服务的压力。结肠胶囊内窥镜(CCE)提供了一种非侵入性的替代方法。尽管几项系统综述显示了合理的息肉检出率,但临床怀疑仍然存在。目的:本荟萃综述和总括性荟萃分析旨在以CT结肠镜或结肠镜检查作为参考标准,综合CCE在息肉和结直肠癌检测中的诊断准确性的证据。方法:系统检索EMBASE、MEDLINE和PubMed,对CCE检测息肉和结直肠癌的诊断准确性进行系统评价。根据PRISMA准则进行了定性专题审查和综合。采用随机效应的双变量广义线性混合模型进行汇总诊断准确性估计,并使用限制最大似然估计进行元回归。结果:纳入9个系统综述,包括28项独特的研究(3472名参与者)。对于任何大小的息肉,合并的每位患者敏感性为0.79 (95% CI: 0.69-0.86),特异性为0.77 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82),曲线下面积(AUC)为0.81。对于小于或等于6 mm的息肉,敏感性和特异性分别为0.80和0.87 (AUC 0.81),对于小于或等于10 mm的息肉,敏感性和特异性分别为0.88和0.95 (AUC 0.95)。第二代CCE (CCE2)提高了所有息肉大小的诊断准确性。对于任何大小的息肉,CCE2的敏感性为0.90,特异性为0.81,AUC为0.82。对于小于或等于6 mm和小于或等于10 mm的息肉,auc分别为0.92和0.94。CCE2在检测任何息肉大小和息肉小于6 mm方面显示出高灵敏度,具有低异质性(p > 0.05, I 2)结论:CCE2对息肉和结直肠癌检测具有高诊断准确性。尽管技术挑战依然存在,但CCE2有望成为一种辅助诊断工具,帮助解决日益增长的内窥镜检查服务需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信