Background/objectivePublished studies have shown conflicting results regarding the benefit of Hyoscine Butylbrmoide use during colonoscopy in polyp and adenoma detection rates. This meta-analysis was conducted with the aim to summarize all available evidence.MethodsA literature search was carried out using PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library database from inception to December 2017. Studies that compared the use of Hyoscine Butylbrmoide compared to placebo during colonoscopy were included. Pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model when there was no heterogeneity identified.ResultsOf the 423 retrieved studies, eight met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of polyp and adenoma detection rates.There was no significant difference between the Hyoscine and placebo groups in polyp detection rate (49.3% vs 48%, OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.90–1.23, P = 0.50). Adenoma detection rate was also not significantly different between the 2 groups 33.7% vs, 31%; OR = 1.13; 95%CI: 0.95–1.35; P = 0.16). No heterogeneity was observed (P = 0.65, I2 = 0%).ConclusionThis meta-analysis found no significant impact of Hyoscine on polyp and adenoma detection when used during colonoscopy.

Background/objective: Published studies have shown conflicting results regarding the rate of wound infection between primary and delayed closures in open appendicectomy. This meta-analysis was performed with the aim to summarize all available evidence. Methods: A literature search was carried out using Medline, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from inception to January 2018. Randomized controlled studies that compared primary closure (PC) to delayed closure (DC) in appendicectomy were included. Pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model when there was no heterogeneity identified. Results: Of the 471 retrieved studies, eight met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. These trials included 1,263 patients, of whom 623 patients underwent delayed closure and 640 primary closure. Surgical Site Infections SSI rates were not significantly different between the DC and PC groups (16.25% & 12.68% respectively. OR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.23-1.54. There was a high heterogeneity among the analyzed studies (I2=82%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis found no benefit in performing delayed primary closure over primary closure in open appendicectomy. Highlights: