Literature DB >> 17149549

Patient factors associated with a faster insertion of the colonoscope.

Rodolfo Arcovedo1, Charles Larsen, Hector Salazar Reyes.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are many factors involved in a difficult colonoscopy. Our hypothesis is that colonic intubation is more difficult in thin patients. We consider it beneficial to know a priori who would be in need of specialized equipment or maneuvers for a successful colonoscopy.
METHODS: Over two years, 435 consecutive patients who underwent elective colonoscopy by one surgeon were included in this prospective study. Patients who underwent prior colectomy, who had cancer other than that of the cecum, or who had had an emergent endoscopy were excluded from the study. The time it took to insert the colonoscope from the anus to the cecum was recorded and rounded to the nearest minute. For statistical analysis, we considered gender, age, body mass index (BMI), abdominal girth, diagnosis, presence or absence of prior pelvic surgery, need for external compression, and quality of the bowel preparation. The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the median time of intubation between males and females.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant correlation between the BMI, abdominal girth, presence or absence of prior abdominal or pelvic surgery, and the length of insertion of the endoscope. Statistical significance was reached between the male and female. The median time to insert the colonoscope in the males was 7 min (mean = 8.14 min), while in females it was 10 min (mean = 10.6 min).
CONCLUSIONS: Females had a significantly longer time of insertion of the colonoscope compared to males. Neither abdominal girth nor body mass seems to reflect the volume of the peritoneal cavity. It seems possible that there is a content-container mismatch in thin female patients. We suggest repeating the study using other anthropometric measurements to calculate the intraperitoneal volume. This may help select the patients who would benefit from a deeper sedation or more specialized equipment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17149549     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-006-9116-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  11 in total

1.  Speeding up cecal intubation: its role in the efficiency of colonoscopy delivery.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Method of colonoscopy in 42 consecutive patients presenting after prior incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Brody W Goodwine
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Usefulness of a small-caliber, variable-stiffness colonoscope as a backup in patients with difficult or incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  Akira Horiuchi; Yoshiko Nakayama; Masashi Kajiyama; Hideyasu Fujii; Naoki Tanaka
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Total colonoscopy: is it always possible?

Authors:  J D Waye; E Bashkoff
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1991 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Difficult sigmoid colon intubation: guide wire exchange technique.

Authors:  R M Ness; K Gottlieb; D K Rex; G A Lehman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Prospective assessment of colonoscopic intubation skills in trainees.

Authors:  A Chak; G S Cooper; E W Blades; M Canto; M V Sivak
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy: thinner is not always better.

Authors:  J C Anderson; J D Gonzalez; C R Messina; B J Pollack
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for colonoscopy in adults.

Authors:  T Saifuddin; M Trivedi; P D King; R Madsen; J B Marshall
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  W C Cirocco; L C Rusin
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  Why is colonoscopy more difficult in women?

Authors:  B P Saunders; M Fukumoto; S Halligan; C Jobling; M E Moussa; C I Bartram; C B Williams
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  9 in total

1.  Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy.

Authors:  Hoi-Poh Tee; Crispin Corte; Hamdan Al-Ghamdi; Emilia Prakoso; John Darke; Raman Chettiar; Wassim Rahman; Scott Davison; Sean-P Griffin; Warwick-S Selby; Arthur-J Kaffes
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Magnifying gastroscopy using a soft black hood for difficult colonoscopy.

Authors:  Hisashi Nakamura; Kuangi Fu; Akihiko Yamamura
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Impact of obesity on bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Brian B Borg; Nitin K Gupta; Gary R Zuckerman; Bhaskar Banerjee; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 11.382

4.  Factors Influencing Cecal Intubation Time during Retrograde Approach Single-Balloon Enteroscopy.

Authors:  Tzu-Ming Ou; Peng-Jen Chen; Yu-Lueng Shih; Meng-Ting Wang; Hsin-Hung Huang; Wei-Kuo Chang; Tsai-Yuan Hsieh; Tien-Yu Huang
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.260

5.  Difficult colonoscopy score identifies the difficult patients undergoing unsedated colonoscopy.

Authors:  Hui Jia; Limei Wang; Hui Luo; Shaowei Yao; Xiangping Wang; Linhui Zhang; Rui Huang; Zhiguo Liu; Xiaoyu Kang; Yanglin Pan; Xuegang Guo
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  The impact of visceral adipose tissue as best predictor for difficult colonoscopy and the clinical utility of a long small-caliber scope as rescue.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Kashiwagi; Nagamu Inoue; Toshifumi Yoshida; Rieko Bessho; Kazuaki Yoneno; Hiroyuki Imaeda; Haruhiko Ogata; Takanori Kanai; Yoshinori Sugino; Yasushi Iwao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Predictors for difficult cecal insertion in colonoscopy: The impact of obesity indices.

Authors:  Soo Yun Moon; Byung Chang Kim; Dae Kyung Sohn; Kyung Su Han; Bun Kim; Chang Won Hong; Bum Joon Park; Kum Hei Ryu; Ji Hyung Nam
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Effect of an External Abdominal Compression Device on Polyp Detection during Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Swathi Eluri; Thomas M Runge; Holly Cirri; Christopher F Martin; Evan S Dellon; Seth D Crockett
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol Res       Date:  2018

9.  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 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.