Cardiff University | Prifysgol Caerdydd ORCA
Online Research @ Cardiff 
WelshClear Cookie - decide language by browser settings

Comparative efficacy and safety of endoscopic modalities for colorectal cancer screening in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Sinopoulou, Vasiliki, Nigam, Gaurav B., Gordon, Morris, Ganeshan, Meghana, Tokonyai, Mitchell Rudo, Dolwani, Sunil ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3113-5472, Iacucci, Marietta, Rutter, Matt, Subramanian, Venkat, Wilson, Ana and East, James E. 2025. Comparative efficacy and safety of endoscopic modalities for colorectal cancer screening in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 23 (12) , pp. 2128-2143. 10.1016/j.cgh.2024.11.008

[thumbnail of PIIS1542356524010735.pdf]
Preview
PDF - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview
License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License Start date: 11 December 2024

Abstract

Background & Aims Long-standing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) increases the risk of colonic neoplasia, necessitating effective screening strategies. This network meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety between different endoscopic modalities in the high-definition (HD) era. Methods We searched CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, MEDLINE, and WHO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endoscopic modalities for screening colonoscopy in patients with IBD up to February 2024. The primary outcome was detection of any dysplastic lesion per patient. The certainty of the evidence was GRADE-assessed. Results A total of 26 RCTs involving 4159 participants were included, comparing 6 endoscopic modalities: HD white light endoscopy (HD-WLE), HD virtual chromoendoscopy (HD-VCE), HD dye-based chromoendoscopy (HD-DCE), HD-WLE with segmental re-inspection (SR), auto-fluorescence imaging (AFI), and full-spectrum endoscopy (FUSE). HD-DCE may have a small benefit in detecting dysplasia over HD-WLE (low certainty, small magnitude;: relative risk [RR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.98). FUSE may be no different to HD-WLE (low certainty: RR, 3.24; 95% CI, 0.66–15.87). The other modalities were assessed as very low certainty (HD-WLE with SR: RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.66–2.77; AFI: RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.55–2.57; HD-VCE: RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.69–1.43). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. Limited data on serious adverse events precluded meta-analysis; 2 serious events were reported among 2164 patients (very low certainty). Conclusions HD-DCE is the only modality for IBD surveillance with evidence (low-certainty) demonstrating potential to detect more dysplastic lesions compared with HD-WLE. There was no evidence to support any of the other modalities as an alternative due to very low-certainty evidence.

Item Type: Article
Date Type: Publication
Status: Published
Schools: Schools > Medicine
Additional Information: License information from Publisher: LICENSE 1: URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, Start Date: 2024-12-11
Publisher: Elsevier
ISSN: 1542-3565
Date of First Compliant Deposit: 16 December 2024
Date of Acceptance: 7 November 2024
Last Modified: 11 Dec 2025 16:31
URI: https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/174745

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item Edit Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics