We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Limited evidence of abnormal intra-colonic pressure profiles in diverticular disease - a systematic review.
Colorectal Disease 2017 June
AIM: Abnormal colonic pressure profiles and high intraluminal pressures are postulated to contribute to the formation of sigmoid colon diverticulosis and the pathophysiology of diverticular disease. This study aimed to review evidence for abnormal colonic pressure profiles in diverticulosis.
METHOD: All published studies investigating colonic pressure in patients with diverticulosis were searched in three databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus). No language restrictions were applied. Any manometry studies in which patients with diverticulosis were compared with controls were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) for case-control studies was used as a measure of risk of bias. A cut-off of five or more points on the NOS (fair quality in terms of risk of bias) was chosen for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Ten studies (published 1962-2005) met the inclusion criteria. The studies followed a wide variety of protocols and all used low-resolution manometry (sensor spacing range 7.5-15 cm). Six studies compared intra-sigmoid pressure, with five of six showing higher pressure in diverticulosis vs controls, but only two reached statistical significance. A meta-analysis was not performed as only two studies were above the cut-off and these did not have comparable outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review of manometry data shows that evidence for abnormal pressure in the sigmoid colon in patients with diverticulosis is weak. Existing studies utilized inconsistent methodology, showed heterogeneous results and are of limited quality. Higher quality studies using modern manometric techniques and standardized reporting methods are needed to clarify the role of colonic pressure in diverticulosis.
METHOD: All published studies investigating colonic pressure in patients with diverticulosis were searched in three databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus). No language restrictions were applied. Any manometry studies in which patients with diverticulosis were compared with controls were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) for case-control studies was used as a measure of risk of bias. A cut-off of five or more points on the NOS (fair quality in terms of risk of bias) was chosen for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Ten studies (published 1962-2005) met the inclusion criteria. The studies followed a wide variety of protocols and all used low-resolution manometry (sensor spacing range 7.5-15 cm). Six studies compared intra-sigmoid pressure, with five of six showing higher pressure in diverticulosis vs controls, but only two reached statistical significance. A meta-analysis was not performed as only two studies were above the cut-off and these did not have comparable outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review of manometry data shows that evidence for abnormal pressure in the sigmoid colon in patients with diverticulosis is weak. Existing studies utilized inconsistent methodology, showed heterogeneous results and are of limited quality. Higher quality studies using modern manometric techniques and standardized reporting methods are needed to clarify the role of colonic pressure in diverticulosis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app