BACKGROUND AND AIM: CO2 has been reported to be absorbed from the bowel more rapidly than air, resulting in a discomfort reduction after colonoscopy. Its role in deeply sedated patients is limited. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation during colonoscopy in patients deeply sedated withpropofol. METHODS: A total of 125 continuous patients were randomly assigned to receive either CO2 (n = 63) or air (n = 62) insufflation during propofol-sedated colonoscopy. Postcolonoscopy abdominal pain, distention, and satisfaction were assessed at 1, 3, and 24 h after the procedure, and the proportions of pain-free and distention-free patients were compared. Residual bowel gas in the colon and small bowel was evaluated at 1 h after colonoscopy. End-tidal CO2 and O2 saturation was measured for safety analysis. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding the postcolonoscopy abdominal pain, distention, and subjective satisfaction at 1 h (P < 0.001) and 3 h (P < 0.01) after the procedure. Patients' pain and distention at 1 and 3 h after the procedure were significantly lower in the CO2 group (P < 0.01). Residual bowel gas in the colon and small bowel was significantly less in the CO2 group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in end-tidal CO2 levels between two groups before, during, and after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with air, CO2 insufflation during colonoscopy reduced postcolonoscopy abdominal discomfort and improved patients' satisfaction. It was safe to use CO2 insufflation in deeply sedated colonoscopy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND AIM: CO2 has been reported to be absorbed from the bowel more rapidly than air, resulting in a discomfort reduction after colonoscopy. Its role in deeply sedated patients is limited. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation during colonoscopy in patients deeply sedated with propofol. METHODS: A total of 125 continuous patients were randomly assigned to receive either CO2 (n = 63) or air (n = 62) insufflation during propofol-sedated colonoscopy. Postcolonoscopy abdominal pain, distention, and satisfaction were assessed at 1, 3, and 24 h after the procedure, and the proportions of pain-free and distention-free patients were compared. Residual bowel gas in the colon and small bowel was evaluated at 1 h after colonoscopy. End-tidal CO2 and O2 saturation was measured for safety analysis. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding the postcolonoscopy abdominal pain, distention, and subjective satisfaction at 1 h (P < 0.001) and 3 h (P < 0.01) after the procedure. Patients' pain and distention at 1 and 3 h after the procedure were significantly lower in the CO2 group (P < 0.01). Residual bowel gas in the colon and small bowel was significantly less in the CO2 group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in end-tidal CO2 levels between two groups before, during, and after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with air, CO2 insufflation during colonoscopy reduced postcolonoscopy abdominal discomfort and improved patients' satisfaction. It was safe to use CO2 insufflation in deeply sedated colonoscopy.
Authors: Su Young Kim; Jun-Won Chung; Jung Ho Kim; Yoon Jae Kim; Kyoung Oh Kim; Kwang An Kwon; Dong Kyun Park Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 4.623