Literature DB >> 35043233

Optimizing cecal views during colonoscopy using patient position change.

Maria MacDonald1, Alison Greene2, Mark Borgaonkar3, Nicholas A Fairbridge4, Jerry McGrath3, Chris Smith5, Chantae Garland6, Lisa Bacque5, David Pace5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient positioning has been found to be a simple technique to improve luminal distention and visualization during colonoscopy. This study examined which position provided the cleanest image of the cecum using the Boston Bowel Prep Scale (BBPS) and the best view of the cecum overall as ranked by blinded assessors.
METHODS: A sample of 90 sets of cecal images were obtained from patients undergoing a non-urgent colonoscopy. Each set included cecal images of patients while lying in three positions-right lateral decubitus, left lateral decubitus, and supine. Two authors reviewed these sets of images and excluded those that were unclear. A third author, blinded to the position, selected the final 33 sets of images. Two experienced endoscopists completed a blinded survey of each image set. They used the BBPS to assess and score each image as the primary outcome measure. The endoscopists also ranked each image set in terms of the best overall view of the cecum. Data were collected using Qualtrics software. Nonparametric tests were used to analyze the data using SPSS software (v.25). A p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: The BBPS showed a significant difference between patient positions when tested by Kruskal-Wallis. Subsequent Mann Whitney U tests indicated that the right lateral decubitus position was ranked higher than left lateral decubitus or supine positions. There was no significant difference in the left and supine positions. Cohen's Kappa suggested moderate agreement between raters. The raters also favored the right lateral position over the other positions when assessing overall image preference displaying the cecum.
CONCLUSION: These results indicate that positioning patients in the right lateral decubitus position provides the best view of the cecum during colonoscopy.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cecum; Colonoscopy; Patient Positioning; Right lateral

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35043233     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09012-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   3.453


  10 in total

Review 1.  Serrated lesions in colorectal cancer screening: detection, resection, pathology and surveillance.

Authors:  James E East; Michael Vieth; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Magnitude, Risk Factors, and Factors Associated With Adenoma Miss Rate of Tandem Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shengbing Zhao; Shuling Wang; Peng Pan; Tian Xia; Xin Chang; Xia Yang; Liliangzi Guo; Qianqian Meng; Fan Yang; Wei Qian; Zhichao Xu; Yuanqiong Wang; Zhijie Wang; Lun Gu; Rundong Wang; Fangzhou Jia; Jun Yao; Zhaoshen Li; Yu Bai
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Position changes improve visibility during colonoscope withdrawal: a randomized, blinded, crossover trial.

Authors:  James E East; Noriko Suzuki; Naila Arebi; Paul Bassett; Brian P Saunders
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-12-04       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  A randomized controlled trial comparing right and left lateral decubitus starting position on outcomes in colonoscopy.

Authors:  Alison Greene; Mark Borgoankar; Kathy Hodgkinson; Chantae Garland; Lisa Bacque; David Pace
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale.

Authors:  Audrey H Calderwood; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Robotic colorectal cancer surgery in China: a nationwide retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Jianmin Xu; Bo Tang; Taiyuan Li; Baoqing Jia; Hongliang Yao; Ren Zhao; Weitang Yuan; Ming Zhong; Pan Chi; Yanbing Zhou; Xiongfei Yang; Longwei Cheng; Yulong He; Yongxiang Li; Weidong Tong; Xuejun Sun; Zhiwei Jiang; Kang Wang; Xiaorong Li; Xin Wang; Ye Wei; Zongyou Chen; Xiaoqiao Zhang; Yingjiang Ye; Fanghai Han; Kaixiong Tao; Dalu Kong; Ziqiang Wang; Cheng Zhang; Guodong He; Qingyang Feng
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Mobile cecum: an incidental finding.

Authors:  Kirti Garude; Sandeep Rao
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 0.656

8.  The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research.

Authors:  Edwin J Lai; Audrey H Calderwood; Gheorghe Doros; Oren K Fix; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-01-10       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Effect of Dynamic Position Changes on Adenoma Detection During Colonoscope Withdrawal: A Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial.

Authors:  Seung-Woo Lee; Jae Hyuck Chang; Jeong-Seon Ji; Il Ho Maeong; Dae Young Cheung; Joon Sung Kim; Young-Seok Cho; Wook-Jin Chung; Bo-In Lee; Sang-Woo Kim; Byung-Wook Kim; Hwang Choi; Myung-Gyu Choi
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 10.864

10.  My approach to water-assisted colonoscopy.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Iosif Beintaris
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-12-22
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.