Table 2.
Randomized controlled studies comparing the water method and air insufflation for colonoscopy: number of enrolled patients, options for sedation, cecal intubation rate and outcomes (pain, willingness to repeat the procedure, recovery time)
| Study | No. of patients | Sedation | Cecal intubation (%) | Outcame measures | |||||||
| Pain score (0-10) | Willingness to repeat | Recovery time (min) | |||||||||
| Colonoscopy studies | WW | Air | WW | Air | WW | Air | WW | Air | WW | Air | |
| Leung JW et al[45] 2009 | 28 | 28 | Minimal with increments as needed | 100 | 100 | 1.3 | 4.1 0.0002 | 96% | 96% NS | 13.6 | 19.8 |
| 0.0005 | |||||||||||
| Radaelli et al[48] 2010 | 116 | 114 | On-demand | 94 | 95 | 2.8 | 3.9 0.05 | 90.50% | 81.60% 0.05 | NR | NR |
| Leung FW et al[46] 2010 | 42 | 40 | unsedated | 78 | 98 | 3.0 | 6 0.004 | 93% | 78% 0.018 | NR | NR |
| Leung CW et al[47] 2010 | 112 | 114 | Minimal sedation | 100 | 100 | 4.1 | 5.3 0.001 | 1.41 | 1.471 NS | NR | NR |
| Ransibrahmanakul K et al[49] 2010 | 31 | 31 | Minimal sedation | 94 | 94 | 3.6 | 5.5 0.05 | 93.50% | 80.6 NS | 8.8 | 10.4 NS |
| Leung JW et al[22] 2011 | 50 | 50 | On-demand | 100 | 100 | 2.3 | 4.9 0.001 | 90% | 94% NS | 8.4 | 12.3 0.019 |
| Hseih YH et al[51] 2011 | 90 | 89 | Minimal sedation | 99.9 | 99.9 | 2.5 | 3.4 0.02 | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Pohl J et al[50] 2011 | 58 | 58 | On-demand | 82.8 | 96.5 | 2.8 | 4.2 0.02 | 72.40% | 67.2% NS | NR | NR |
| Amato A et al[36] 2011 | 113 | 113 | On-demand | 97.3 | 99.1 | 2.8 | 4.6 0.01 | 90% | 79.6% 0.03 | 0-8 | 0-53 NS |
NR = Not reported;
Continuous Likert scale (1 = minimal; 7 = maximal); NS: Not significant.