Literature DB >> 10699777

Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for colonoscopy in adults.

T Saifuddin1, M Trivedi, P D King, R Madsen, J B Marshall.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are few published data on how different types of colonoscopes affect success in reaching the cecum and patient comfort. We examined the feasibility of using a pediatric colonoscope for routine colonoscopy in adults and investigated whether there were subgroups of patients in whom use of this instrument was preferable.
METHODS: One-hundred fifty adults undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to colonoscopy with a standard colonoscope (Olympus CF-100L) or with a pediatric colonoscope (Olympus PCF-100). All procedures were performed by a faculty endoscopist and timed by an independent observer. After examinations, the endoscopist graded procedure difficulty and patients were given a questionnaire that assessed their experience.
RESULTS: The adult (n = 77) and pediatric (n = 73) colonoscope groups were comparable in all outcomes measured, including success in reaching the cecum (91% vs. 93%, p = 0.61), mean time to reach the cecum (11.4 vs. 9.7 min, p = 0.07), mean total procedure time (21.8 vs. 21.9 min, p = 0.95), mean meperidine dose (55 vs. 52 mg, p = 0.17); median midazolam dose (2.0 mg in both groups, p = 0.10), the endoscopists' perception of procedure difficulty, and patient comfort scales. Of the 7 patients in whom colonoscopy with the adult colonoscope was unsuccessful, the cecum was reached in 4 by switching to a pediatric colonoscope (all women, 3 of whom had prior hysterectomy). In the 5 patients in whom colonoscopy with the pediatric colonoscope was unsuccessful, the cecum was reached in 1 by switching to an adult colonoscope. Including the cases in which the cecum was reached by switching to the alternative colonoscope, the overall frequency of cecal intubation was 143 of 150 (95%). Subgroup analysis disclosed no difference between the 2 groups in outcomes when gender, presence of diverticulosis, and patient size were considered. Colonoscopy with the pediatric colonoscope was more successful than with the adult instrument in reaching the cecum in women with prior hysterectomy (11 of 12 [92%] vs. 15 of 21 [71%]); however, the numbers in each group were relatively small and the difference was not significant (p = 0.22).
CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric colonoscope is suitable for routine colonoscopy in adults. It is also useful in patients in whom colonoscopy with the adult colonoscope is unsuccessful in reaching the cecum (particularly in women). Additional study is needed to see if the pediatric colonoscope is actually superior to the adult colonoscopy for routine colonoscopy in women with prior hysterectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10699777     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(00)70361-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  20 in total

1.  Underutilisation of the gastroscope for total colonoscopy in adults: a survey of two European countries.

Authors:  Andriani Koumi; Evangelos Kalaitzakis; Alastair Forbes; Marios Z Panos
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  New endoscopy devices to improve population adherence to colorectal cancer prevention programs.

Authors:  Asimina Gaglia; Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Wilfried Veltzke-Schlieker
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-07-16

3.  Does type of instrument influence colonoscopy performance and sedation practice?

Authors:  Ramesh-P Arasaradnam; Paul-D Hurlstone
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Colonoscopy using a small-caliber colonoscope with passive-bending after incomplete colonoscopy due to sharp angulation or pain.

Authors:  Koichiro Sato; Fumiko Shigiyama; Sayo Ito; Tomoyuki Kitagawa; Kenji Tominaga; Takeshi Suzuki; Iruru Maetani
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Colonoscopy with magnetic control system to navigate the forepart of colonoscope shortens the cecal intubation time.

Authors:  Chung-Sheng Yang; Fat-Moon Suk; Chun-Nan Chen; Cheng-Long Chuang; Joe-Air Jiang; Chih-Wen Liu; Gi-Shih Lien
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  A prospective randomized study of the use of an ultrathin colonoscope versus a pediatric colonoscope in sedation-optional colonoscopy.

Authors:  Koichiro Sato; Sayo Ito; Tomoyuki Kitagawa; Koichi Hirahata; Daisuke Hihara; Kenji Tominaga; Ichiro Yasuda; Iruru Maetani
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Patient factors associated with a faster insertion of the colonoscope.

Authors:  Rodolfo Arcovedo; Charles Larsen; Hector Salazar Reyes
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Methods of reducing discomfort during colonoscopy.

Authors:  Felix W Leung
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 9.  Colonoscopy, pain and fears: Is it an indissoluble trinomial?

Authors:  Lucio Trevisani; Angelo Zelante; Sergio Sartori
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-06-16

10.  Routine colonoscopy with a standard gastroscope. A randomized comparative trial in a western population.

Authors:  Till Wehrmann; Izabel Lechowicz; Ksenia Martchenko; Andrea Riphaus
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.