Effect of Endocuff use on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 2 Multiple sensitivity analysis for outcomes with detected heterogeneity

Sensitivity analysis	ADR, I2% (P value)/RR (95%CI)	MAC, I2% (P value)/MD (95%CI)
None performed	71 (< 0.001)	99 (< 0.001)
	1.18 (1.05-1.32)	0.30 (-0.17-0.78)
By excluding one study at a time
Floer et al[15]	61 (0.008)/1.13. (1.02-1.26)	97 (< 0.001)/0.36 (-0.08-0.79)
Van Doorn et al[16]	69 (0.002)/1.22 (1.07-1.38)	99 (< 0.001)/0.32 (-0.20-0.85)
Biecker et al[17]	73 (< 0.001)/1.17 (1.03-1.32)	79 (< 0.001)/0.17 (0.01-0.33)
De Palma et al[18]	74 (< 0.001)/1.19 (1.06-1.35)	ΝΑ
Bhattacharrya et al[19]	68 (0.003)/1.22 (1.08-1.38)	99 (< 0.001)/0.36 (-0.16-0.88)
González-Fernández et al[20]	71 (< 0.001)/1.16 (1.03-1.30)	ΝΑ
Ngu et al[21]	75 (< 0.001)/1.20 (1.04-.38)	99 (< 0.001)/0.32 (-0.21-0.86)
Wada et al[22]	66 (0.005)/1.14 (1.02-1.28)	99 (< 0.001)/0.28 (-0.25-0.80)
Rex et al[23]	74 (< 0.001)/1.19 (1.04-1.37)	99 (<0.001)/0.30 (-0.21-0.82)
By indication of examinations
Screening ≤ 50%[16,18,21-23]	63 (0.03)/1.31 (1.01-1.27)	22 (0.28)/0.27 (0.15-0.40)
Screening > 50%[19,20]	80 (0.02)/1.21 (0.70-2.09)	ΝΑ
By generation of device
First generation Endocuff[15-18,20,22,23]	73 (0.001)/1.25 (1.07-1.46)	100 (< 0.001)/0.39 (-0.20-0.98)
Endocuff Vision[19,21]	68 (0.08)/1.05 (0.90-1.23)	53 (0.14)/0.11 (-0.12-0.34)
By ADR of the conventional colonoscopy group
≤ 35%[15,17,18,20]	49 (0.12)/1.37 (1.08-1.74)	100 (< 0.001)/0.50 (-0.48-1.48)
> 35%[16,19,21-23]	71 (0.008)/1.10 (0.99-1.24)	49 (0.10)/0.22 (0.08-0.37)

ADR: Adenoma detection rate; MAC: Mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy; RR: Relative risk; CI: Confidence interval; MD: Mean difference.