运动干预联合咀嚼口香糖在结肠镜检查肠道准备中的应用研究

目的探讨运动干预联合咀嚼口香糖对服用复方聚乙二醇电解质散(PEG)进行肠道准备患者的肠道准备质量及不良反应的影响。方法选取2017年6月-2018年6月在我院消化内镜室行结肠镜检查前肠道准备的患者300例为研究对象,采用随机数字表法将其分为联合组、口香糖组和对照组,各100例。对照组在检查当日提前4~6 h服用PEG等渗溶液2000 mL,每10 min服用250 mL,2 h内服完,并嘱患者多运动;口香糖组在对照组基础上按要求每服用250 mL,咀嚼无糖口香糖1粒,持续10 min,共8颗;联合组在口香糖组基础上在嚼口香糖同时持续步行10 min,速度达到50步/min及以上。采用Boston量表评价3组患者的肠道清洁度,记录患者首次排便及大便排空时间,记录操作时间及不良反应发生情况。结果共291例患者完成研究,联合组右半结肠、横结肠、左半结肠BBPS评分、BBPS总分及祛泡效果评分均高于口香糖组及对照组(P<0.05);联合组首次排便时间、大便排空时间、插镜时间短于口香糖组及对照组(P<0.05);联合组及口香糖组恶心、呕吐、腹胀发生率低于对照组(P<0.05),联合组腹胀发生率低于口香糖组(P<0.05)。结论运动干预联合咀嚼口香糖可提高服用PEG肠道准备患者的肠道准备质量,缩短肠道准备时间及操作时间,减少不良反应的发生率。     

How do you measure performance as a colonoscopist?

Aim The aim of this study was to describe an easy and reproducible method of measuring clinical performance in colonoscopy. Method Data from all endoscopy procedures performed within the main endoscopy unit at Derriford Hospital between January and December 2007 were analysed. Points were allocated for given procedures. A local health economic analysis revealed that at least 8 points (or four colonoscopies) must be performed to meet list costs. The clinical performance was described as a capability index of crude Caecal Intubation Rate (CIR) vs the mean Points Performed/Endoscopy List (points/list). Results Overall, 3884 colonoscopies were performed, with a mean crude CIR of 89.6% and 8.3 points/List. Only 7/23 endoscopists consistently met the Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) standard in a cost‐effective way. An annual colonoscopy rate of ≥ 150 cases was associated with higher points per list (points/list) (P = 0.003). Endoscopists offering ≥ 15% of cases as training cases had significantly higher crude CIRs and points/list (P = 0.051; P = 0.017). Conclusions Clinical performance is a function of quality provided in a cost‐effective way. Our capability index is an effective and reproducible way of measuring clinical performance. Training was not associated with reduced volume.     

Appearance of a colovesical fistula at cystoscopy

Colovesical fistulae typically present with pneumaturia and/or fecaluria. Diverticulitis, inflammatory bowel disease, and malignancies of the colon are the commonest causes. The fistulous tract and adjacent organs are best demonstrated by contrast‐enhanced CT scan with rectal contrast or MRI. Biopsy at cystoscopy/colonoscopy is necessary for complete evaluation and treatment planning.     

Screening Preferences of Patients at Familial Risk of Colorectal Cancer

Our primary objective was to assess the screening preferences of patients at familial risk of colorectal cancer. Asymptomatic subjects aged 18–75 with a single first-degree relative diagnosed with colorectal cancer (n = 48) or polyps (n = 52) were asked to identify a preferred screening strategy, test features influencing their choice, and level of interest in decision-making after reviewing a decision aid describing the pros and cons of currently recommended screening tests. Although both groups preferred colonoscopy, 40% of subjects with a family history of colorectal cancer and 48% of those with a family history of polyps preferred alternative strategies. Accuracy was the most commonly identified test feature influencing test preference. Most subjects (66%) felt that selection of screening test should be a patient dominant or shared process. We conclude that patients at familial risk of colorectal cancer have distinct screening preferences that often vary from current recommendations.     

Factors associated with the technical performance of colonoscopy: An EPAGE Study

BACKGROUND: Variations in colonoscopy practice exist, which may be related to healthcare quality. AIMS: To determine factors associated with three performance indicators of colonoscopy: complete colonoscopy, adenomatous polyp diagnosis, and duration. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy from 21 centres in 11 countries. METHODS: This prospective observational study used multiple variable regression analyses to identify determinants of the quality indicators. RESULTS: Six thousand and four patients were included in the study. Patients from private, open-access centres (odds ratio: 3.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.87-5.38) were more likely to have a complete colonoscopy than patients from public, gatekeeper centres. Patients from centres where over 50% of the endoscopists were of senior rank were roughly twice as likely to have an adenoma diagnosed, and longer average withdrawal duration (odds ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.07-1.09) was associated with more frequent adenoma diagnoses. Patients who had difficulty during colonoscopy had longer durations to caecum (time ratio: 2.87, 95% confidence interval: 2.72-3.01) and withdrawal durations (time ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.33) than patients who had no difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors have been identified as being associated with key quality indicators. The non-modifiable factors permit the identification of patients who may be at greater risk of not having quality colonoscopy, while changes to the modifiable factors may help improve the quality of colonoscopy.     

Increased prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in korean patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas: a case-control study

Background/Aims

Recent data from Western populations have suggested that patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas are at a higher risk for the development of colorectal neoplasia. In this study, we compared the frequency of colorectal neoplasia in patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas to healthy control subjects.

Methods

This retrospective case-control study used the databases of 3 teaching hospitals in Gyeonggi-do Province, South Korea. The colonoscopy findings of patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas were compared with those of age- and gender-matched healthy individuals who had undergone gastroduodenoscopies and colonoscopies during general screening examinations.

Results

Between 2001 and 2008, 45 patients were diagnosed endoscopically with sporadic duodenal adenomas; 26 (58%) of these patients received colonoscopies. Colorectal neoplasia (42% vs 21%; odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 7.4) and advanced colorectal adenoma (19% vs 3%; OR, 9.0; 95% CI, 1.6 to 50.0) were significantly more common in patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas than in healthy control subjects.

Conclusions

Compared with healthy individuals, patients with sporadic duodenal adenomas were at a significantly higher risk for developing colorectal neoplasia. Such at-risk patients should undergo routine screening colonoscopies.     

Colon capsule endoscopy: Detection of colonic polyps compared with conventional colonoscopy and visualization of extracolonic pathologies

BACKGROUND:

Conventional colonoscopy (CC) is the gold standard for diagnostic examination of the colon. However, the overall acceptance of this procedure is low due to patient fears of complications or embarrassment. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) represents a minimally invasive, patient-friendly procedure that offers complete visualization of the entire intestine.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the PillCam Colon 2 (Given Imaging Ltd, Israel) capsule with regard to feasibility, sensitivity and specificity for the detection of colonic pathologies and additional recorded extracolonic findings.

METHODS:

CCE was performed before CC in patients indicated for CC for known or suspected colonic disease. The results of both techniques were compared with regard to polyp detection. Additionally, bowel preparation and extracolonic pathologies were analyzed.

RESULTS:

Twenty-four patients (mean age 51.1 years) were included in the analysis. Visualization of the colon was complete in 23 CCs and 17 CCEs. No adverse events or major technical failures occurred. CC detected 47 polyps and CCE detected 43 polyps of any size (per-finding sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 67.6%). The accuracy of CCE in detecting polyp carriers was 81.5% (per-patient analysis). On average, the colon was adequately cleansed in 90.1% of patients. CCE identified esophageal, gastric and small bowel pathologies in seven (24%), nine (38%) and 14 (58%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

CCE proved to be technically feasible and safe. Acceptable sensitivity and moderate specificity levels in polyp detection were recorded. Bowel preparation was adequate in most patients. Because extracolonic pathologies were effectively visualized, new indications for the PillCam Colon 2 may be defined.     

Endotics system vs colonoscopy for the detection of polyps

AIM: To compare the endotics system (ES), a set of new medical equipment for diagnostic colonoscopy, with video-colonoscopy in the detection of polyps. METHODS: Patients with clinical or familial risk of colonic polyps/carcinomas were eligible for this study. After a standard colonic cleaning, detection of polyps by the ES and by video-colonoscopy was performed in each patient on the same day. In each single patient, the assessment of the presence of polyps was performed by two independent endoscopists, who were randomly assigned to evaluate, in a blind fashion, the presence of polyps either by ES or by standard colonoscopy. The frequency of successful procedures (i.e. reaching to the cecum), the time for endoscopy, and the need for sedation were recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the ES were also calculated. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients (40 men, mean age51.9 ± 12.0 years) were enrolled. The cecum was reached in 81.6% of ES examinations and in 94.3% of colonoscopies (P = 0.03). The average time of endoscopy was 45.1 ± 18.5 and 23.7 ± 7.2 min for the ES and traditional colonoscopy, respectively (P < 0.0001). No patient required sedation during ES examination, compared with 19.7% of patients undergoing colonoscopy (P < 0.0001). The sensitivity and specificity of ES for detecting polyps were 93.3% (95% CI: 68-98) and 100% (95% CI: 76.8-100), respectively. PPV was 100% (95% CI: 76.8-100) and NPV was 97.7% (95% CI: 88-99.9). CONCLUSION: The ES allows the visualization of the entire colonic mucosa in most patients, with good sensitivity/specificity for the detection of lesions and without requiring sedation.