Meta-analysis: The use of carbon dioxide insufflation vs. room air insufflation for gastrointestinal endoscopy

Weilin Wang,Zehui Wu,Qiang Sun,JianFeng Wei,X. F. Chen,Dongkai Zhou,Lin Zhou,Haiyang Xie,Shusen Zheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2012.05078.x
IF: 9.524
2012-01-01
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Abstract:Background Carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation has been proposed as an alternative to air insufflation to distend the lumen in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. Aim To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised ti-olled trials (RC'T s) in which CO2 irisilffiati.ora with room air a tl on in CT end sc 13Y was compared conMethods Electronic and manual searches were combined to search RCTs. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation were systematically assessed. Res u Its Twenty-one RCTs [13 on colonoscopy, four on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (FRCP), two on double-balloon enteroscupy (DBE), one on oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, and one on flexible sigmoidoscopy] were identified, For colonoscopy, CO2 insufflation resulted lower postprocedural pain intensity, and increased the proportion of patient without pain at 1 h (RR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.37-147) and 6 h (RR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.14-1.44) postprocedure, For FRCP, the pain releasing effect of CO2 insufflation was not obvious (SMD: 1.48, 95% CI: 3.56, 0.59). CO2 insufflation revealed no consistent advantages in the RCTs of DBE, but was shown as safe as air insufflation in oesophagus/stomach endoscopic submucosal dissection in one study. pCO2 level showed no significant variation during these procedures. Conclusions Compared with air in, stifriati,drl, CO2 1,risufflatinn during hotorioshopv causes lower postprocedural pain and bowel distension without significant pCO2 variation. More RCTs are needed to assess its advantages in other GI endoscopic procedures..
What problem does this paper attempt to address?