Literature DB >> 7720449

Confirmation of cecal intubation during colonoscopy.

W C Cirocco1, L C Rusin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Establishing intubation of the cecum can be a laborious, frustrating, and sometimes erroneous endeavor. Following confirmed colonoscopic intubation of the cecum, the presence of three anatomic landmarks (alone and in combination) were evaluated to precisely define their reliability.
METHODS: Between February 1991 and January 1992, 771 of 904 consecutive colonoscopic examinations were completed to the cecum as confirmed by fluoroscopy.
RESULTS: All three cecal landmarks studied (ileocecal valve, appendiceal orifice, and transillumination) were present in 64 percent of patients, and two landmarks were seen in 32 percent (96 percent of patients had multiple landmarks). The ileocecal valve was the most reliable cecal landmark (98 percent), followed by the appendiceal orifice (87 percent) and transillumination through the abdominal wall (75 percent).
CONCLUSIONS: The ileocecal valve is the most reliable cecal landmark and is invariably visualized, even when all other cecal landmarks are obscure. Although other cecal landmarks are usually identifiable, they are most valuable when found in association with the ileocecal valve.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7720449     DOI: 10.1007/bf02054230

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  10 in total

1.  Triradiate caecal fold: Is it a useful landmark for caecal intubation in colonoscopy?

Authors:  Andrew Finlayson; Raaj Chandra; Ian A Hastie; Ian T Jones; Susan Shedda; Michael K-Y Hong; Aileen Yen; Ian P Hayes
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-09-25

2.  Relationship of colonoscopy completion rates and endoscopist features.

Authors:  Gavin C Harewood
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  The use of high definition colonoscopy versus standard definition: does it affect polyp detection rate?

Authors:  John Richardson; Anthony Thaventhiran; Hugh Mackenzie; Benjamin Stubbs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Anatomic classification of the endoscopic appearance of the normal appendiceal orifice: a novel tool for recognition and documentation of cecal intubation.

Authors:  Florence M Aslinia; Preet Bagi; John D Sorkin; Richard B Williams; Robert G Knodell; Lawrence F Sorkin; Bruce D Greenwald; Allison Steele; Jean-Pierre Raufman
Journal:  Clin Anat       Date:  2011-09-12       Impact factor: 2.414

5.  Subhepatic caecal tumour in an adult with intestinal malrotation.

Authors:  Joseph Michael Norris; Desmond Owusu; Ammar Adel Abdullah; Kanapathippillai Rajaratnam
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2014-10-29

6.  A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?

Authors:  C J A Bowles; R Leicester; C Romaya; E Swarbrick; C B Williams; O Epstein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 7.  Establishing a biological profile for interval colorectal cancers.

Authors:  Amy L Cisyk; Harminder Singh; Kirk J McManus
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  New interpretation for diagnostic yield of ileoscopy: A prospective study and a brief review.

Authors:  Mohammad Hasssan Emami; Iman Saramipoor Behbahan; Hamed Daghagh Zade; Hoshang Daneshgar
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 1.852

9.  Meticulous cecal image documentation at colonoscopy is associated with improved polyp detection.

Authors:  Mo Hameed Thoufeeq; Bjorn Joakim Rembacken
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2015-09-15

Review 10.  Ilececum: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Shou-Jiang Tang; Ruonan Wu
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2019-02-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.