Literature DB >> 11818918

A randomized controlled trial in a training institution comparing a pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope, a pediatric colonoscope, and an adult colonoscope.

Douglas A Shumaker1, Atif Zaman, Ronald M Katon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are few comparative data on the efficacy of different colonoscopes. This study compared the efficacy of a new pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope with that of standard pediatric and adult colonoscopes in the performance of routine colonoscopy.
METHODS: Three hundred sixty-three consecutive patients were randomized to undergo colonoscopy with a pediatric variable stiffness (n = 122), pediatric (n = 114), or adult colonoscope (n = 127). Primary outcomes recorded were minutes to the cecum and completeness of the examination. Secondary outcomes included patient tolerance, use of abdominal compression, and endoscopists' assessment of the difficulty of the procedure.
RESULTS: Cecal intubation rates were not statistically different between the groups: variable stiffness (94.3%), pediatric (96.5%), and adult (89.8%) (p = 0.099). There was no significant difference in mean insertion time, patient tolerance, use of abdominal compression, or endoscopists' global assessment or examination difficulty between groups. Overall, the initial completion rate of 93% increased to 97% on switching to a different colonoscope. Colonoscopy was unsuccessful more often and was more time consuming in women who had undergone hysterectomy.
CONCLUSION: The variable stiffness colonoscope performs well, but does not appear to offer any distinct advantage over standard pediatric or adult colonoscopes for routine colonoscopy. Further study may identify subgroups of patients that benefit from this new technology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11818918     DOI: 10.1067/mge.2002.121189

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


  11 in total

Review 1.  Colonoscopy: basic principles and novel techniques.

Authors:  Yark Hazewinkel; Evelien Dekker
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  Prospective comparison of an adult, an intermediate pediatric and a long pediatric colonoscope in the training process of gastrointestinal fellows to achieve high-quality practice in colonoscopy.

Authors:  George Tribonias; Athanasios-Dimitrios Bacasis; Yoriaki Komeda; George Lyrakos; Ioannis Giotis; Niki Daferera; Dimitrios Charisis; Margarita-Eleni Manola; Dimitrios Karapiperis
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-05-12

3.  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

4.  CO(2) insufflation for potentially difficult colonoscopies: efficacy when used by less experienced colonoscopists.

Authors:  Toshio Uraoka; Jun Kato; Motoaki Kuriyama; Keisuke Hori; Shin Ishikawa; Keita Harada; Koji Takemoto; Sakiko Hiraoka; Hideyuki Fujita; Joichiro Horii; Yutaka Saito; Kazuhide Yamamoto
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-11-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Effect of GI endoscopy nurse experience on screening colonoscopy outcomes.

Authors:  Evan S Dellon; Quinn Kerr Lippmann; Joseph A Galanko; Robert S Sandler; Nicholas J Shaheen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-06-05       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Patient self-administered abdominal pressure to reduce loop formation during minimally sedated colonoscopy.

Authors:  Yu-Hsi Hsieh; Kuo-Chih Tseng; An-Liang Chou
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Does the variable-stiffness colonoscope makes colonoscopy easier? A meta-analysis of the efficacy of the variable stiffness colonoscope compared with the standard adult colonoscope.

Authors:  Qin Xie; Bin Chen; Liu Liu; Huatian Gan
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  A randomized controlled trial of comparison on time and rate of cecal and termianl Ileal intubation according to adult-colonoscope length: intermediate versus long.

Authors:  Kwang-Min Kim; Seung-Hwa Lee; Duck-Joo Lee; Kyu-Nam Kim; Sang-Wook Seo; Hyung-Suk Lee; Dong-Ryul Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2013-12-26       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Pain and sedation during colonoscopy - a never ending story.

Authors:  Øyvind Holme; Michael Bretthauer
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2016-05

Review 10.  Pediatric Colonoscopy: The Changing Patterns and Single Institutional Experience Over a Decade.

Authors:  Jae Hong Park
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2018-03-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.