螺旋肠镜与单气囊肠镜对小肠疾病的评估和治疗:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 2.3 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Bisher Sawaf, Mohammed S Beshr, Rana H Shembesh, Mohammed Abu-Rumaileh, Wasef Sayeh, Azizullah Beran, Yusuf Hallak, Sami Ghazaleh, Muhammed Elhadi, Yaseen Alastal
{"title":"螺旋肠镜与单气囊肠镜对小肠疾病的评估和治疗:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Bisher Sawaf, Mohammed S Beshr, Rana H Shembesh, Mohammed Abu-Rumaileh, Wasef Sayeh, Azizullah Beran, Yusuf Hallak, Sami Ghazaleh, Muhammed Elhadi, Yaseen Alastal","doi":"10.5946/ce.2025.184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Device-assisted enteroscopy has advanced small bowel disorder management. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the clinical and procedural outcomes between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was performed on December 1, 2024, in the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies that compared spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy. The outcomes included diagnostic and therapeutic yields, total procedure time, depth of maximum insertion, and adverse event rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies (including 496 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The diagnostic yield was similar between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy (risk ratio [RR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.20; p=0.24). The therapeutic yield also showed no significant difference (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69; p=0.83). The total procedure time was comparable (mean difference, -22.85 minutes; 95% CI, -46.83 to 1.12; p=0.06), although motorized spiral enteroscopy reduced the procedure time (p<0.001). Spiral enteroscopy achieved greater depth of maximum insertion (standardized mean difference, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.65-2.01; p<0.001). Adverse event rates were comparable (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.80-3.70; p=0.16).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Spiral and single-balloon enteroscopies demonstrated similar diagnostic and therapeutic yields and safety. Spiral enteroscopy achieved a greater insertion depth, and motorized systems improved the efficiency in terms of procedure times.</p>","PeriodicalId":10351,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spiral enteroscopy versus single-balloon enteroscopy for the evaluation and treatment of small bowel disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Bisher Sawaf, Mohammed S Beshr, Rana H Shembesh, Mohammed Abu-Rumaileh, Wasef Sayeh, Azizullah Beran, Yusuf Hallak, Sami Ghazaleh, Muhammed Elhadi, Yaseen Alastal\",\"doi\":\"10.5946/ce.2025.184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Device-assisted enteroscopy has advanced small bowel disorder management. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the clinical and procedural outcomes between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was performed on December 1, 2024, in the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies that compared spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy. The outcomes included diagnostic and therapeutic yields, total procedure time, depth of maximum insertion, and adverse event rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies (including 496 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The diagnostic yield was similar between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy (risk ratio [RR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.20; p=0.24). The therapeutic yield also showed no significant difference (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69; p=0.83). The total procedure time was comparable (mean difference, -22.85 minutes; 95% CI, -46.83 to 1.12; p=0.06), although motorized spiral enteroscopy reduced the procedure time (p<0.001). Spiral enteroscopy achieved greater depth of maximum insertion (standardized mean difference, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.65-2.01; p<0.001). Adverse event rates were comparable (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.80-3.70; p=0.16).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Spiral and single-balloon enteroscopies demonstrated similar diagnostic and therapeutic yields and safety. Spiral enteroscopy achieved a greater insertion depth, and motorized systems improved the efficiency in terms of procedure times.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2025.184\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2025.184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:器械辅助肠镜检查具有先进的小肠疾病治疗方法。我们进行了这项荟萃分析,比较螺旋肠镜和单气囊肠镜的临床和手术结果。方法:于2024年12月1日在PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行系统检索,以确定螺旋肠镜检查和单气囊肠镜检查的比较研究。结果包括诊断和治疗收益、总手术时间、最大插入深度和不良事件发生率。结果:5项研究(包括496例患者)符合纳入标准。螺旋肠镜和单气囊肠镜的诊断率相似(风险比[RR], 1.07; 95%可信区间[CI], 0.96-1.20; p=0.24)。两组疗效差异无统计学意义(RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69; p=0.83)。尽管电动螺旋肠镜缩短了手术时间,但总的手术时间是相当的(平均差异为-22.85分钟;95% CI, -46.83至1.12;p=0.06)。结论:螺旋肠镜和单气囊肠镜具有相似的诊断和治疗效率和安全性。螺旋肠镜检查实现了更大的插入深度,电动系统在手术时间方面提高了效率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spiral enteroscopy versus single-balloon enteroscopy for the evaluation and treatment of small bowel disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background/aims: Device-assisted enteroscopy has advanced small bowel disorder management. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the clinical and procedural outcomes between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy.

Methods: A systematic search was performed on December 1, 2024, in the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies that compared spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy. The outcomes included diagnostic and therapeutic yields, total procedure time, depth of maximum insertion, and adverse event rates.

Results: Five studies (including 496 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The diagnostic yield was similar between spiral enteroscopy and single-balloon enteroscopy (risk ratio [RR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.20; p=0.24). The therapeutic yield also showed no significant difference (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.69; p=0.83). The total procedure time was comparable (mean difference, -22.85 minutes; 95% CI, -46.83 to 1.12; p=0.06), although motorized spiral enteroscopy reduced the procedure time (p<0.001). Spiral enteroscopy achieved greater depth of maximum insertion (standardized mean difference, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.65-2.01; p<0.001). Adverse event rates were comparable (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.80-3.70; p=0.16).

Conclusions: Spiral and single-balloon enteroscopies demonstrated similar diagnostic and therapeutic yields and safety. Spiral enteroscopy achieved a greater insertion depth, and motorized systems improved the efficiency in terms of procedure times.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Endoscopy
Clinical Endoscopy GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
95
审稿时长
26 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