BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is considered the most effective method for diagnosing colorectal diseases, but its application is sometimes limited due to invasiveness, patient intolerance, and the need for sedation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to improve the problem of loop formation and shorten the cecal intubation time of colonoscopy by using a magnetic control system (MCS). METHODS: Two experienced gastroenterologists, three trainees, and a novice repeated colonoscopy without or with MCS on three colonoscopy training model simulator cases. These cases were divided into introductory (case 2) and challenging levels (cases 4 and 5). The cecal intubation times were recorded. RESULTS: For all cases, the average cecal intubation times for the experienced gastroenterologists with MCS were significantly shorter than without MCS (case 2: 52.45 vs. 27.65 s, p < 0.001; case 4: 166.7 vs. 120.55 s, p < 0.01; case 5: 130.35 vs. 100.2 s, p < 0.05). Those of the trainees also revealed significantly shorter times with MCS (case 2: 67.27 vs. 51 s, p < 0.01; case 4: 253.27 vs. 170.97 s, p < 0.001; case 5: 144.1 vs. 85.57 s, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Conducting colonoscopy with MCS is safe and smooth, and shortens the cecal intubation time by navigating the forepart of the colonoscope. In addition, all diagnostic and therapeutic benefits of conventional colonoscopy are retained.
BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is considered the most effective method for diagnosing colorectal diseases, but its application is sometimes limited due to invasiveness, patient intolerance, and the need for sedation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to improve the problem of loop formation and shorten the cecal intubation time of colonoscopy by using a magnetic control system (MCS). METHODS: Two experienced gastroenterologists, three trainees, and a novice repeated colonoscopy without or with MCS on three colonoscopy training model simulator cases. These cases were divided into introductory (case 2) and challenging levels (cases 4 and 5). The cecal intubation times were recorded. RESULTS: For all cases, the average cecal intubation times for the experienced gastroenterologists with MCS were significantly shorter than without MCS (case 2: 52.45 vs. 27.65 s, p < 0.001; case 4: 166.7 vs. 120.55 s, p < 0.01; case 5: 130.35 vs. 100.2 s, p < 0.05). Those of the trainees also revealed significantly shorter times with MCS (case 2: 67.27 vs. 51 s, p < 0.01; case 4: 253.27 vs. 170.97 s, p < 0.001; case 5: 144.1 vs. 85.57 s, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Conducting colonoscopy with MCS is safe and smooth, and shortens the cecal intubation time by navigating the forepart of the colonoscope. In addition, all diagnostic and therapeutic benefits of conventional colonoscopy are retained.
Authors: Boris Vucelic; Douglas Rex; Roland Pulanic; Jorge Pfefer; Irena Hrstic; Bernard Levin; Zamir Halpern; Nadir Arber Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Christopher W Teshima; Huseyin Aktas; Jelle Haringsma; Ernst J Kuipers; Peter B F Mensink Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Axel Eickhoff; Jacques van Dam; Ralf Jakobs; Valerie Kudis; Dirk Hartmann; Ulrich Damian; Uwe Weickert; Dieter Schilling; Jürgen F Riemann Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Hemant A Shah; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; Therese A Stukel; Linda Rabeneck Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2007-03-21 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Bernard Levin; David A Lieberman; Beth McFarland; Kimberly S Andrews; Durado Brooks; John Bond; Chiranjeev Dash; Francis M Giardiello; Seth Glick; David Johnson; C Daniel Johnson; Theodore R Levin; Perry J Pickhardt; Douglas K Rex; Robert A Smith; Alan Thorson; Sidney J Winawer Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-02-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: R Eliakim; K Yassin; Y Niv; Y Metzger; J Lachter; E Gal; B Sapoznikov; F Konikoff; G Leichtmann; Z Fireman; Y Kopelman; S N Adler Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 10.093