BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Success rate of cecal intubation, endoscopist's difficulty, and procedure-related patient pain are still problems for beginners performing colonoscopy. New methods to aid colonoscopic insertion such as warm water instillation and oil lubrication have been proposed. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of using warm water or oil in colonoscopy. METHODS:Colonoscopy was performed in 117 unsedated patients by three endoscopists-in-training. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups, using a conventional method with administration of antispasmodics, warm water instillation, and oil lubrication, respectively. Success rate of total intubation within time limit (15 min), cecal intubation time, degree of endoscopist's difficulty, and level of patient discomfort were compared among the three groups. RESULTS:Cecal intubation time was shorter in the warm water group than in the conventional and oil groups. Degree of procedural difficulty was lower in the warm water group, and patient pain score was higher in the oil lubrication group, compared with the other groups. However, there was no significant difference in success rate of intubation within time limit among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The warm water method is a simple, safe, and feasible method for beginners. Oil lubrication may not be a useful method compared with conventional and warm water method.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Success rate of cecal intubation, endoscopist's difficulty, and procedure-related patientpain are still problems for beginners performing colonoscopy. New methods to aid colonoscopic insertion such as warm water instillation and oil lubrication have been proposed. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of using warm water or oil in colonoscopy. METHODS: Colonoscopy was performed in 117 unsedated patients by three endoscopists-in-training. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups, using a conventional method with administration of antispasmodics, warm water instillation, and oil lubrication, respectively. Success rate of total intubation within time limit (15 min), cecal intubation time, degree of endoscopist's difficulty, and level of patient discomfort were compared among the three groups. RESULTS: Cecal intubation time was shorter in the warm water group than in the conventional and oil groups. Degree of procedural difficulty was lower in the warm water group, and patientpain score was higher in the oil lubrication group, compared with the other groups. However, there was no significant difference in success rate of intubation within time limit among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The warm water method is a simple, safe, and feasible method for beginners. Oil lubrication may not be a useful method compared with conventional and warm water method.
Authors: Peter B Cotton; Patrick Connor; Daniel McGee; Paul Jowell; Nick Nickl; Steve Schutz; Joseph Leung; John Lee; Eric Libby Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Fw Leung; Jo Harker; Jw Leung; Rm Siao-Salera; Sk Mann; Fc Ramirez; S Friedland; A Amato; F Radaelli; S Paggi; V Terruzzi; Yh Hsieh Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2011-07-01
Authors: Fw Leung; Jo Harker; Jw Leung; Rm Siao-Salera; Sk Mann; Fc Ramirez; S Friedland; A Amato; F Radaelli; S Paggi; V Terruzzi; Yh Hsieh Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2011-07-01
Authors: Fw Leung; R Cheung; Rs Fan; Ls Fischer; S Friedland; Sb Ho; Yh Hsieh; I Hung; Mk Li; S Matsui; Kr McQuaid; G Ohning; A Ojuri; T Sato; Ak Shergill; Ma Shoham; Tc Simons; Mh Walter; A Yen Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2012-07-01
Authors: Catherine Ngo; Joseph W Leung; Surinder K Mann; Cecilia Terrado; Christopher Bowlus; Drew Ingram; Felix W Leung Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2012-07-01