Tapered colonoscope performs better than the pediatric colonoscope in female patients: a direct comparison through tandem colonoscopy

BACKGROUND: The pediatric variable-stiffness colonoscope (PVSC) is used by many endoscopists to negotiate the colon that requires a flexible colonoscope; it has a smaller diameter, but may lead to excessive looping. A prototype colonoscope tapers from an adult width to a pediatric diameter at approximately 25 cm. The tapered colonoscope (TC), while retaining the flexibility of the PVSC, has the column strength of the adult colonoscope to help negotiate the proximal colon. OBJECTIVE: Our hypothesis is that use of the TC in female patients would be associated with less looping than the PVSC during the procedure, fewer required maneuvers, and thus a quicker examination. DESIGN: Direct comparison through tandem colonoscopies. SETTING: University endoscopy suite. PATIENTS: Forty unselected female patients. INTERVENTIONS: Tandem colonoscopies with PVSC and TC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Time to the cecum and the ability to retroflex in the cecum. RESULTS: Compared with the PVSC, the TC had faster times to achieve cecal intubation (mean [standard deviation], 8.83+/-4.68 minutes versus 6.88+/-4.08 minutes; P=.013) and a higher rate of retroflexion in the cecum (31/40 patients vs 39/40 patients; P<.01). Use of the TC was associated with a decreased need for abdominal pressure (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The TC achieved faster cecal intubation rates and had a higher success of cecal retroflexion than a PVSC. This performance likely was because of diminished looping and thus a decreased need for maneuvers. The TC may be preferable to the PVSC for female patients.     

A prospective trial of variable stiffness colonoscopes with different tip diameters in unsedated patients

OBJECTIVES: Few data exist comparing the clinical versatility of variable stiffness (VS) colonoscopes with different tip diameters and stiffness ranges. We compared the intubation time and success rate, maneuvering ease, and patient comfort of three colonoscopes: pediatric VS (PVSC), nonmagnifying adult VS (AVSC), and magnifying VS (MVSC).
METHODS: Two hundred sixteen consecutive patients scheduled for routine colonoscopy were randomized to undergo colonoscopy with one of the three different colonoscopes (PVSC N = 72, AVSC N = 72, MVSC N = 72). Outcome measurements included time required for cecal intubation, success rate for cecal intubation, maneuvering ease, and patient comfort.
RESULTS: The overall success rate for cecal intubation was 95.83%. Intubation time was significantly different among the groups (PVSC 12.88 ± 7.11 min, AVSC 9.25 ± 5.16 min, MVSC 9.62 ± 5.55 min; P < 0.01). Intubation time with PVSC required about 3 min more when compared with AVSC or MVSC. Multivariate analyses revealed that colonoscopy with AVSC required 3 min less when compared with PVSC ( P = 0.03). Age greater than 55 yr, waist circumference, prior hysterectomy, and pain experienced by patients were also factors affecting intubation time.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a PVSC might not decrease patient discomfort or intubation time. The ideal colonoscope is the AVSC that has a modest diameter and stiffness range and thus is capable of achieving both a short intubation time and an acceptable comfort level. We also should bear in mind that MVSC has an additional function of magnifying observation.     

Method of colonoscopy in 42 consecutive patients presenting after prior incomplete colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES: Cecal intubation is one of the goals of colonoscopy. We sought to describe the methodology used by a single experienced examiner to perform colonoscopy in a consecutive group of patients with challenging colons. METHODS: Records of 42 consecutive patients with one or more prior unsuccessful attempts at colonoscopy by a gastroenterologist or surgeon and referred for a repeat attempt at colonoscopy were reviewed. RESULTS: Colonoscopy was complete to the cecum in 40 of the 42 patients (95%). An array of methods was employed, including propofol sedation (n = 2), pediatric colonoscope (n = 8), an external straightener (n = 9), external straightener with pediatric colonoscope (n = 2), upper endoscope (n = 8), guidewire exchange (n = 3), and enteroscope with a colon straightener (n = 1) or an enteroscope straightener (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: A variety of methods and instruments were employed to achieve a high cecal intubation rate during colonoscopy in a group of patients with prior incomplete colonoscopies. Others may find one or more of these methods useful in patients with challenging colons.     

Use of a variable-stiffness colonoscope decreases the dose of patient-controlled sedation during colonoscopy: a randomized comparison of 3 colonoscopes

BACKGROUND: The variable-stiffness colonoscope incorporates different degrees of stiffness of the insertion tube, which can be adjusted during the examination. Whether its use can lead to reduced procedure-related pain and sedative use is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare the use of 3 types of colonoscope with different shaft stiffnesses in relation to procedure-related pain and sedative consumption. DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial. SETTING: Endoscopy unit of a university-affiliated hospital. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing ambulatory colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Random assignment was made of patients into 3 groups to receive colonoscopic examinations by one of the 3 types of colonoscope: conventional standard adult size, 1.3-m; 1.6-m; and the new variable-stiffness adult size, full-length (1.6-m) colonoscope. A mixture of propofol and afentanil, delivered by a patient-controlled syringe pump, was used for sedation in all groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included dose of patient-controlled sedation consumed, pain score, cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, requirement of abdominal pressure and change of patients' positions during colonoscopy, and endoscopists and patients' satisfaction scores according to a visual analog scale. RESULTS: A total of 335 patients were randomized. Patients in group 3 used significantly less propofol (in milligrams per kilograms, mean [SD]) compared with the other 2 groups (group 1: 1.00 [0.75], group 2: 0.93 [0.62], and group 3: 0.75 [0.65]; P = .02; 1-way analysis of variance). The mean (SD) pain score was also lower in group 3. LIMITATIONS: The endoscopists were not blinded. CONCLUSION: The use of the new variable-stiffness adult-size colonoscope significantly reduced procedure-related pain and doses of sedative medications during colonoscopy.     

Utility of single and double balloon endoscopy in patients with difficult colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial

AIM: To compare the utility of single-balloon colonoscopy (SBC) or double-balloon colonoscopy (DBC) for difficult colonoscopies. METHODS: Between August 2008 and June 2010, patients in whom total colonoscopy failed within 30 min of insertion were assigned randomly to undergo either SBC or DBC. No sedatives were used. After the endoscopy, all patients were asked to evaluate pain during the procedure on a 10-point analog scale (1 = no pain; 10 = worst imaginable pain) with a questionnaire. The study outcomes were the cecal intubation rate and time, endoscopic findings, complications, and pain score. RESULTS: The SBC and DBC groups included 11 and 10 patients, respectively. All but one SBC patient achieved total colonoscopy successfully. The cecal intubation times were 18 min (range: 10-85 min) and 12.8 min (range: 9.5-42 min) in the SBC and DBC groups, respectively (P= 0.17). No difference was observed in the prevalence of colon polyps between the SBC and DBC groups (45% vs 30%, P = 0.66). SBC showed advanced colon cancer in the ascending colon, which was inaccessible using conventional colonoscopy. The respective pain scores were 5 (1-10) [median (range)] and 5 (1-6) in the SBC and DBC groups (P = 0.64). No complications were noted in any patient. CONCLUSION: The utility of singleand double-balloon endoscopy for colonoscopy seems comparable in patients with incomplete colonoscopy using a conventional colonoscope.     

Colonoscopy: go small for success?

Colonoscopy using standard adult colonoscopes can be difficult in patients with fixed, angulated sigmoid colons. An earlier study from the same center suggested that in women who have had hysterectomy, successful colonoscopy occurred with greater frequency when initiated with a pediatric colonoscope versus an adult colonoscope. This follow-up study was a nonblinded clinical trial comparing the use of a pediatric colonoscope with an adult colonoscope for routine colonoscopy in women with previous hysterectomy. A total of 100 female patients presenting for an outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to use the pediatric (Olympus PCF-100) or adult (Olympus CF-100L or CF-Q140L) colonoscope.
The primary outcome was the comparative rate of cecal intubation. Secondary outcomes included total procedure time, cecal insertion time, sedative administration, procedural difficulty, and patients' experience. Endoscopists encountering difficult insertion had the opportunity to use the alternate scope. The cecum was reached in 49 of 51 (96.1%) women when using the pediatric colonoscope versus 35 of 49 (71.4%) women when using the adult colonoscope. Of the 14 incomplete examinations initiated with an adult colonoscope, the pediatric colonoscope was used 12 times, and the cecum was reached in nine, adjusting the rate of successful colonoscopy to 44 of 49 (89.8%). There was no statistical difference in total procedure time, cecal insertion time, sedative drug dosages, procedural difficulty, or patient comfort using either scope.
When performing routine colonoscopy in women with previous hysterectomy, the authors recommend either starting with a pediatric colonoscope or having one available in the advent of a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon.     

Using the Gastroscope for Incomplete Colonoscopy

PURPOSE Reports of virtual colonoscopy demonstrate sensitivity similar to that of conventional colonoscopy for polyps 5 mm or larger, suggesting the validity of its use for colorectal cancer screening. Critical to the success of either procedure is the ability to evaluate the entire colon. Cecal intubation rates during diagnostic or screening colonoscopies vary from 53 to 99 percent. We describe the added value of using a gastroscope to perform a colonoscopic examination that would otherwise result in an incomplete colonoscopy.METHODS From January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002 a total of 1,979 colonoscopies were performed. A gastroscope was used in 1.3 percent (n = 26) of these colonoscopies in an effort to complete the index examination initially started with a standard or pediatric colonoscope. The success rate was defined as intubating proximal to the initial area of impasse and entering the cecum.RESULTS Cecal intubation was achieved in 62 percent of patients.CONCLUSIONS In patients with incomplete conventional colonoscopy, the gastroscope can usually advance through the initial area of impasse with a cecal intubation rate of 62 percent.Presented at The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Annual Meeting, Dallas, Texas, May 8 to 13, 2004.     

Intermediate-length colonoscope needs more training duration than long-length colonoscope

Abstract

Objective. Few data are available on the influence of a colonoscope length for trainees, which could affect both the duration of training and colonoscopy quality. We conducted this study to validate which scope needs more duration for training to reach technical competence and to shows better quality indicators during diagnostic colonoscopy. Materials and methods. We conducted a prospective randomly assigned study from April 2010 to February 2011 at Asan Medical Center. Among the 1329 patients enrolled, 1200 colonoscopies were analyzed. We compared cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation time (<20 min), and withdrawal time between the trainees using the intermediate-length colonoscope and those using long-length colonoscope. Results. Trainees who used the long-length colonoscope showed a higher overall cecal intubation rate (88.2% vs. 81.0%, p = 0.001) and adenoma detection rate (49.7% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001) than those using the intermediate-length colonoscope. The successful cecal intubation rate improved significantly and reached the requisite standard of competence (>90%) after 90 procedures in the long-length colonoscope group. However, the trainees using the intermediate-length colonoscope reached the requisite standard of competence after 150 procedures. Logistic regression analysis revealed that prolonged cecal intubation was associated with the use of the intermediate-length colonoscope, poor colon preparation, a small number of esophagastroduodenoscopy or sigmoidoscopy procedures conducted, and pain during procedures. Conclusions. During the same training period, use of the long-length colonoscope in trainee was better in terms of reaching competency and quality indicators, and was less painful for the patients during colonoscopic procedures.     

A randomized controlled trial evaluating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope

OBJECTIVES: Considering the increasing demand for colonoscopy, auxiliary devices that could facilitate the examination would be useful. A hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope has been reported to be helpful in detecting and removing colorectal polyps. However, its usefulness in aiding scope intubation has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: Patients for colonoscopy between July 2004 and May 2005 in Tokyo University Hospital were enrolled to this randomized controlled trial, and assigned to colonoscopy with a transparent hood, a short hood, or no hood. Colonoscopies were conducted by trainees without sedation. The evaluated outcomes were cecal intubation rate, trainee intubation rate (cecal intubation within 15 min), cecal intubation time, and polyp detection rate. RESULTS: Enrolled 684 patients were randomly assigned to transparent hood (N = 221), short hood (N = 228), and no hood (N = 235) groups. The overall cecal intubation rate was 95.3% (652/684) and did not differ among the groups. The overall trainee intubation rate was 55.1% (377/684) and significantly higher in the transparent hood group than in the no hood group for female patients (60.7%vs 37.4%, P = 0.003). Cecal intubation time was 11.5, 13.5, and 14.0 min in the transparent, short, and no hood groups, respectively, and significantly shorter in the transparent hood group than in the no hood group among overall (P = 0.008), female (P = 0.001), and old (P = 0.04) patients. Polyp detection rate was higher in the transparent hood group than in the no hood group (49.3%vs 39.1%, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The transparent hood was useful in shortening the cecal intubation time especially in difficult cases.     

Variable stiffness colonoscopes are associated with less pain during colonoscopy in unsedated patients

OBJECTIVES: Application of a new variable stiffness colonoscope (VSC) is expected to control loop formation and to lessen patient discomfort. The aim of this prospective study was to compare the efficacy of VSC with a conventional colonoscope (CC) in unsedated colonoscopy, based on the experience of examiners. METHODS: Four-hundred sixty-seven patients were randomly assigned to undergo colonoscopy with either VSC or CC by an endoscopist, including experienced and less-experienced examiners. The percentages of completed procedure and time to cecal intubation were recorded. Patients were asked to rate pain on a 5-point pain score. RESULTS: The percentages of completed procedure with VSC and CC were 98% and 95%, respectively, by less-experienced hands, and 99% and 98%, respectively, by experienced hands. Time for cecal intubation with VSC and CC was 15.7 and 18.5 min, respectively, by less-experienced hands, and 9.8 and 10.6 min, respectively, by experienced hands. A significantly lower mean pain score was noted in VSC patients compared with CC patients, irrespective of experience of the examiner. The percent of patients rating the procedure as moderately or severely painful was significantly lower with VSC than with CC, both in less-experienced (19% vs 40%; p < 0.01) and experienced hands (15% vs 26%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicated that VSC allows favorable examination compared with CC regarding completeness, time to cecal intubation, and comfort of patients undergoing unsedated colonoscopy, irrespective of the examiner's experience. These features suggest VSC as the preferred colonoscope for patients undergoing unsedated colonoscopy.     

Small caliber overtube-assisted colonoscopy

AIM： To combine the benefits of a new thin flexible scope with elimination of excessive looping through the use of an overtube. METHODS： Three separate retrospective series. Series 1：25 consecutive male patients undergoing unsedated colonoscopy using the new device at a Veteran＇s hospital in the United States. Series 2：75 male patients undergoing routine colonoscopy using an adult colonoscope, pediatric colonoscope, or the new device. Series 3：35 patients who had incomplete colonoscopies using standard instruments.
RESULTS： Complete colonoscopy was achieved in all 25 patients in the unsedated series with a median cecal intubation time of 6 min and a median maximal pain score of 3 on a 0-10 scale. In the 75 routine cases, there was significantly less pain with the thin scope compared to standard adult and pediatric colonoscopes. Of the 35 patients in the previously incomplete colonoscopy series, 33 were completed with the new system.
CONCLUSION： Small caliber overtube-assisted colonoscopy is less painful than colonoscopy with standard adult and pediatric colonoscopes. Male patients could undergo unsedated colonoscopy with the new system with relatively little pain. The new device is also useful for most patients in whom colonoscopy cannot be completed with standard instruments.     

Use of a push enteroscope improves ability to perform total colonoscopy in previously unsuccessful attempts at colonoscopy in adult patients

Objective: Total colonoscopy with use of a standard adult colonoscope can be difficult in the presence of a redundant or angulated colon. It is often possible to traverse these areas with the use of a thinner, more flexible endoscope. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of completing total colonoscopy using a push enteroscope when a standard colonoscope was unsuccessful. Methods: A prospective analysis was performed for 721 consecutive colonoscopies attempted by two gastroenterologists. Those patients in whom complete colonoscopy was unsuccessful using the standard colonoscope (Olympus CF-100L) had attempts to complete colonoscopy using the enteroscope (Olympus SIF-100). The extent of each exam was recorded. Additional pathologic findings discovered by the use of the enteroscope and therapeutic interventions performed were additionally noted. Results: Colonoscopy using an enteroscope was performed in 32 patients with successful total colonoscopy in 22 patients (68.7%). Additional pathology was noted in nine patients who had successful complete colonoscopy using the enteroscope; adenomatous polyp (  n = 5  ), adenocarcinoma (  n = 1  ), bleeding source (  n = 2  ), and extent of colitis (  n = 1  ). Total colonoscopy rate using standard adult colonoscope was 93.2% (630 of 676) when cases with poor bowel preparation (  n = 23  ) and obstructing lesions (  n = 14  ) were excluded. When the results of successful colonoscopies with the enteroscope were included, the overall completion rate of total colonoscopy improved to 96.4% (652 of 676). Conclusion: The use of the enteroscope to help evaluate patients who have had incomplete colonoscopies with the standard colonoscope increases the diagnostic yield of colonic examination.     

Incomplete colonoscopy: Maximizing completion rates of gastroenterologists

BACKGROUND

Cecal intubation is one of the goals of a quality colonoscopy; however, many factors increasing the risk of incomplete colonoscopy have been implicated. The implications of missed pathology and the demand on health care resources for return colonoscopies pose a conundrum to many physicians. The optimal course of action after incomplete colonoscopy is unclear.

OBJECTIVES:

To assess endoscopic completion rates of previously incomplete colonoscopies, the methods used to complete them and the factors that led to the previous incomplete procedure.

METHODS:

All patients who previously underwent incomplete colonoscopy (2005 to 2010) and were referred to St Paul’s Hospital (Vancouver, British Columbia) were evaluated. Colonoscopies were re-attempted by a single endoscopist. Patient charts were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS:

A total of 90 patients (29 males) with a mean (± SD) age of 58±13.2 years were included in the analysis. Thirty patients (33%) had their initial colonoscopy performed by a gastroenterologist. Indications for initial colonoscopy included surveillance or screening (23%), abdominal pain (15%), gastrointestinal bleeding (29%), change in bowel habits or constitutional symptoms (18%), anemia (7%) and chronic diarrhea (8%). Reasons for incomplete colonoscopy included poor preparation (11%), pain or inadequate sedation (16%), tortuous colon (30%), diverticular disease (6%), obstructing mass (6%) and stricturing disease (10%). Reasons for incomplete procedures in the remaining 21% of patients were not reported by the referring physician. Eighty-seven (97%) colonoscopies were subsequently completed in a single attempt at the institution. Seventy-six (84%) colonoscopies were performed using routine manoeuvres, patient positioning and a variable-stiffness colonoscope (either standard or pediatric). A standard 160 or 180 series Olympus gastroscope (Olympus, Japan) was used in five patients (6%) to navigate through sigmoid diverticular disease; a pediatric colonoscope was used in six patients (7%) for similar reasons. Repeat colonoscopy on the remaining three patients (3%) failed: all three required surgery for strictures (two had obstructing malignant masses and one had a severe benign obstructing sigmoid diverticular stricture).

CONCLUSION:

Most patients with previous incomplete colonoscopy can undergo a successful repeat colonoscopy at a tertiary care centre with instruments that are readily available to most gastroenterologists. Other modalities for evaluation of the colon should be deferred until a second attempt is made at an expert centre.     

Sedation-free colonoscopy using an upper endoscope is tolerable and effective in patients with low body mass index: a prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE: Small-caliber upper endoscopes can be used safely and effectively for sedation-free colonoscopy. The objective of the study is to assess the efficacy of a small-caliber upper endoscope (9.2 mm) comparing with a standard colonoscope (12.2 mm). METHODS: In a prospective trial, patients undergoing sedation-free colonoscopy were randomly assigned to the upper endoscope (E) or the standard colonoscope (C). Outcome measures included patient self-assessed pain score (4-point scale), endoscopist-assessed pain score (4-point scale), cecal intubation rate, difficult cecal intubation rate (>900 s), number of polyps detected, and complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 244 patients were entered. Clinical characteristics were not different between the two groups. Cecal intubation was achieved in 91.0% of the patients in each group. The mean patient self-assessed pain score (SD) was significantly lower in the E group compared with the C group: 1.44 (0.81) versus 2.08 (1.10), p < 0.001. The mean endoscopist assessment of patient pain score (SD) was significantly lower in the E group compared with the C group as well: 1.27 (0.67) versus 1.58 (0.90), p= 0.003. In patients with low body mass index (BMI < 22 kg/m(2)), the cecal intubation rate was significantly higher in the E group (97.7%vs 79.4%, p= 0.026) and the difficult cecal intubation rate was significantly lower in the E group (9.3%vs 32.4%, p= 0.011). There were no significant differences in the number of polyps detected and complication rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: A small-caliber upper endoscope is tolerable and effective for sedation-free colonoscopy, especially in patients with low BMI.     

Is the variable-stiffness paediatric colonoscope more effective than a standard adult colonoscope for outpatient adult colonoscopy?: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Trials with variable-stiffness colonoscopes have yielded conflicting results regarding efficacy and patient tolerance. AIM: We compared a variable-stiffness paediatric colonoscope with a standard adult colonoscope. METHODS: Two hundred and forty consecutive adult outpatients presenting for colonoscopy were randomised to either a variable-stiffness paediatric colonoscope or an adult colonoscope. If there was difficulty in performing colonoscopy with the assigned scope, the endoscopist was given the option of switching to the alternative instrument. In the condition of a severely fixed, angulated sigmoid colon, a final 'salvage' (backup) option was that of switching to an even thinner diameter paediatric colonoscope. RESULTS: The initial frequency of total colonoscopy was similar with the variable-stiffness paediatric colonoscope and adult colonoscope (95.8% versus 96.6%, p=1.0). Factoring in scope changes, the final frequency was 98.3% versus 99.2% (p=1.0). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of insertion time, doses of sedative medications, scales of procedure difficulty, or patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Adult colonoscope and variable-stiffness paediatric colonoscope are both effective instruments for routine colonoscopy. In cases when the use of the initial scope is unsuccessful, switching to the alternative scope may permit passage to the caecum. There are occasional patients with fixed, angulated sigmoid colons in whom use of an even thinner diameter paediatric colonoscope can be helpful.     

Factors associated with incomplete colonoscopy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer sets a target of cecal intubation in at least 90% of colonoscopies. We conducted a population-based study to determine the colonoscopy completion rate and to identify factors associated with incomplete procedures. METHODS: Men and women 50 to 74 years of age who underwent a colonoscopy in Ontario between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2003, were identified. The first (index) colonoscopy was classified as complete or incomplete. A generalized estimating equations model was used to evaluate the association between patient, endoscopist (specialty, colonoscopy volume), and setting (academic hospital, community hospital, private office) factors and incomplete colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 331,608 individuals had an index colonoscopy, of which 43,483 (13.1%) were incomplete. Patients with an incomplete colonoscopy were older (odds ratio [OR] 1.20 per 10-year increment; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.18-1.22), more likely to be female (OR 1.35; 95% CI: 1.30-1.39), have a history of prior abdominal surgery (OR 1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.09) or prior pelvic surgery (OR 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06). For colonoscopies done in a private office, the odds of an incomplete procedure were more than 3-fold greater than for procedures done in an academic hospital (OR 3.57; 95% CI: 2.55-4.98). CONCLUSIONS: In usual clinical practice in Ontario, 13.1% of colonoscopies are incomplete. The factors most strongly associated with incomplete colonoscopy were increased patient age, female sex, and having the procedure in a private office. Quality improvement programs are needed to improve colonoscopy completion rates.     

Use of a double balloon enteroscope facilitates caecal intubation after incomplete colonoscopy with a standard colonoscope

BACKGROUND: Caecal intubation is a necessary step in the complete endoscopic evaluation of the colon. Studies have estimated that experienced colonoscopists may fail to reach the caecum in up to 10% of cases. AIMS: To evaluate the utility of the double balloon enteroscope used for complete examination of the colon in patients with incomplete standard colonoscopy. PATIENTS: Twenty consecutive patients with incomplete colonoscopies within the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System. Mean age of 66 years (S.D.+/-12 years, range 46-84), 16 men. METHODS: Prospective single-centre case series on the caecal intubation rate using standard double balloon enteroscope technique in patients with previous incomplete conventional colonoscopy. RESULTS: Use of the standard double balloon enteroscope technique permitted complete colonoscopy to be achieved in 95% of the patients (19/20). Seven patients (35%) had significant pathology beyond the extent of the prior incomplete colonoscopy. We performed endoscopic mucosal resection, polypectomy or biopsy. The mean time to reach the caecum was 28 min (S.D.+/-20 min, range 6-90 min). The sedation was similar to conventional colonoscopy. No complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The double balloon enteroscope technology and technique can be used to complete examination of the colon in patients who were referred because of incomplete standard colonoscopy.     

Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy

PURPOSE AND METHODS: Certain factors in a patient's history, such as prior abdominal surgery or complicated diverticular disease, have been reported to hinder cecal intubation during colonoscopy. Over a 16-month period, 1,047 consecutive colonoscopies were prospectively evaluated to determine whether these factors were indeed clinically relevant. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients (9 percent) who had incomplete intubation of the colon, there were significantly more women (66 percent) than men (34 percent) (P <0.001). Women with a history of abdominal hysterectomy had a significantly lower cecal intubation rate (P < 0.01). A history of diverticulitis did not alter the cecal intubation rate. In patients with incomplete colonic intubation, the most proximal extent of intubation was the sigmoid colon in women (31 percent) and the right colon in men (68 percent). Sixty-seven percent of patients with incomplete intubation of the colon had a prior colonoscopy completed to the cecum (67 percent women, 67 percent men), whereas 50 percent had a follow-up colonoscopy completed to the cecum (56 percent women, 40 percent men). CONCLUSIONS: Women, especially those with a history of abdominal hysterectomy, had a significantly lower cecal intubation rate usually because of an impassable sigmoid colon. Prior inability to complete colonoscopy to the cecum does not necessarily forecast future failure.Poster presentation at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 7 to 12, 1995.     

Feasibility of full-spectrum endoscopy:Korea’s first full-spectrum endoscopy colonoscopic trial

AIM: To evaluate the full-spectrum endoscopy(FUSE) colonoscopy system as the first report on the utility thereof in a Korean population.METHODS: We explored the efficacy of the FUSE colonoscopy in a retrospective, single-center feasibility study performed between February 1 and July 20, 2015. A total of 262 subjects(age range: 22-80) underwent the FUSE colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening, polyp surveillance, or diagnostic evaluation. The cecal intubation success rate, the polyp detection rate(PDR), the adenoma detection rate(ADR), and the diverticulum detection rate(DDR), were calculated. Also, the success rates of therapeutic interventions were evaluated with biopsy confirmation.RESULTS: All patients completed the study and the success rates of cecal and terminal ileal intubation were 100% with the FUSE colonoscope; we found 313 polyps in 142 patients and 173 adenomas in 95. The overall PDR, ADR and DDR were 54.2%, 36.3%, and 25.2%, respectively, and were higher in males, and increased with age. The endoscopists and nurses involved considered that the full-spectrum colonoscope improved navigation and orientation within the colon.No colonoscopy was aborted because of colonoscope malfunction.CONCLUSION: The FUSE colonoscopy yielded a higher PDR, ADR, DDR than did traditional colonoscopy, without therapeutic failure or complications, showing feasible, effective, and safe in this first Korean trial.     

A prospective trial of variable stiffness pediatric vs. standard instrument colonoscopy

BACKGROUND: The pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope is believed to have theoretical advantages over the standard colonoscope, however a systematic evaluation of this instrument in routine clinical practice involving adult patients is lacking. METHODS: Consecutive patients (blinded) undergoing colonoscopy in an outpatient endoscopy center by one of 4 experienced colonoscopists had the procedure performed with a standard colonoscope (n=384) or pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope (n=413). Failure to negotiate the sigmoid colon within 10 minutes was regarded as a failure and, if suitable, the patient was crossed over to colonoscopy with the alternative instrument. RESULTS: Median (95% CI) time to the cecum was significantly faster in the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope group (odds ratio 5.0: 95% CI[4.7,5.3] minutes) compared with the standard colonoscope group (odds ratio 5.5: 95% CI[5.2,5.8] minutes, p=0.01). There were 22 failures overall (2.8%), 14 in the standard colonoscope group (3.6%) and 8 in the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope group (1.9%; p=0.1). With regard to the 14 failures in the standard colonoscope group, colonoscopy was attempted with the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope in 13 and completed successfully in 12 (92%). The pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope was superior in cases of severe stenosing diverticular disease; two of 27 examinations with the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope were rated as failed vs. 12 of 18 with the standard colonoscope (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Intubation time was faster with the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope, but use of this instrument was not associated with a superior cecal intubation rate compared with the standard colonoscope. However, in patients with severe stenosing diverticular disease, the intubation rate with the pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope was superior.