Alberto Murino1, Masanao Nakamura2, Edward J Despott2, Chris Fraser2. 1. Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St. Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Imperial College London, UK. Electronic address: albertomurino@yahoo.it. 2. Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St. Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Imperial College London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep small bowel insertion during double balloon enteroscopy can be difficult to achieve. AIMS: To determine the factors influencing depth of insertion during double balloon enteroscopy. METHODS: History of abdomino-pelvic surgery, route of insertion, type of enteroscope, age, sedation or general anaesthesia used and gender were considered as potential influencing factors; procedures were categorised accordingly and maximal depth of insertion calculated. RESULTS: At multivariate analysis, maximal depth of insertion was significantly associated with history of abdominal-pelvic surgery (P<0.001), rectal approach (P=0.011), gender (P=0.02) and use of the therapeutic enteroscope (P=0.047). Mean maximal depth of insertion was 266±12cm, 255±9cm (P=0.50), 197±10cm (P<0.0001), 160±12cm (P<0.01) and 103±33cm (P<0.15) when 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 influencing factors were present, respectively. CONCLUSION: Maximal depth of insertion was significantly influenced by history of abdomino-pelvic surgery, insertion route, gender and type of enteroscope used.
BACKGROUND: Deep small bowel insertion during double balloon enteroscopy can be difficult to achieve. AIMS: To determine the factors influencing depth of insertion during double balloon enteroscopy. METHODS: History of abdomino-pelvic surgery, route of insertion, type of enteroscope, age, sedation or general anaesthesia used and gender were considered as potential influencing factors; procedures were categorised accordingly and maximal depth of insertion calculated. RESULTS: At multivariate analysis, maximal depth of insertion was significantly associated with history of abdominal-pelvic surgery (P<0.001), rectal approach (P=0.011), gender (P=0.02) and use of the therapeutic enteroscope (P=0.047). Mean maximal depth of insertion was 266±12cm, 255±9cm (P=0.50), 197±10cm (P<0.0001), 160±12cm (P<0.01) and 103±33cm (P<0.15) when 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 influencing factors were present, respectively. CONCLUSION: Maximal depth of insertion was significantly influenced by history of abdomino-pelvic surgery, insertion route, gender and type of enteroscope used.
Authors: Robert A Moran; Sindhu Barola; Joanna K Law; Stuart K Amateau; Daniil Rolshud; Erin Corless; Vandhana Kiswani; Vikesh K Singh; Anthony N Kalloo; Mouen A Khashab; Anne Marie Lennon; Patrick I Okolo; Vivek Kumbhari Journal: Clin Med Insights Gastroenterol Date: 2018-01-24