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.     

Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for colonoscopy in adults

BACKGROUND: There are few published data on how different types of colonoscopes affect success in reaching the cecum and patient comfort. We examined the feasibility of using a pediatric colonoscope for routine colonoscopy in adults and investigated whether there were subgroups of patients in whom use of this instrument was preferable. METHODS: One-hundred fifty adults undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were randomized to colonoscopy with a standard colonoscope (Olympus CF-100L) or with a pediatric colonoscope (Olympus PCF-100). All procedures were performed by a faculty endoscopist and timed by an independent observer. After examinations, the endoscopist graded procedure difficulty and patients were given a questionnaire that assessed their experience. RESULTS: The adult (n = 77) and pediatric (n = 73) colonoscope groups were comparable in all outcomes measured, including success in reaching the cecum (91% vs. 93%, p = 0.61), mean time to reach the cecum (11.4 vs. 9.7 min, p = 0.07), mean total procedure time (21.8 vs. 21.9 min, p = 0.95), mean meperidine dose (55 vs. 52 mg, p = 0.17); median midazolam dose (2.0 mg in both groups, p = 0.10), the endoscopists' perception of procedure difficulty, and patient comfort scales. Of the 7 patients in whom colonoscopy with the adult colonoscope was unsuccessful, the cecum was reached in 4 by switching to a pediatric colonoscope (all women, 3 of whom had prior hysterectomy). In the 5 patients in whom colonoscopy with the pediatric colonoscope was unsuccessful, the cecum was reached in 1 by switching to an adult colonoscope. Including the cases in which the cecum was reached by switching to the alternative colonoscope, the overall frequency of cecal intubation was 143 of 150 (95%). Subgroup analysis disclosed no difference between the 2 groups in outcomes when gender, presence of diverticulosis, and patient size were considered. Colonoscopy with the pediatric colonoscope was more successful than with the adult instrument in reaching the cecum in women with prior hysterectomy (11 of 12 [92%] vs. 15 of 21 [71%]); however, the numbers in each group were relatively small and the difference was not significant (p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric colonoscope is suitable for routine colonoscopy in adults. It is also useful in patients in whom colonoscopy with the adult colonoscope is unsuccessful in reaching the cecum (particularly in women). Additional study is needed to see if the pediatric colonoscope is actually superior to the adult colonoscopy for routine colonoscopy in women with prior hysterectomy.     

Use of a pediatric colonoscope improves the success of total colonoscopy in selected adult patients

Background: Colonoscopy using a standard adult colonoscope can be difficult or impossible when there is a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon or stricture. It is sometimes possible to traverse such segments using a smaller-diameter, more flexible pediatric colonoscope. Methods: For this prospective study, one endoscopist started 645 consecutive, elective colonoscopies with a standard adult Olympus CF-100L colonoscope (52% women, 48% men). There were 36 examinations (5.6%) in which the adult colonoscope could not be passed through a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon (n = 34) or a sigmoid colonic stricture (n = 2). In such instances (33 women and 3 men), the endoscopist switched to a pediatric colonoscope. Results: The pediatric colonoscope successfully reached the cecum in 21 of the 36 cases (58.3%). The figure was 38.5% for the older Olympus CF-P20L fiberoptic colonoscope (n = 13) and 69.6% for the newer Olympus PCF-100 videocolonoscope (n = 23). Concomitant conditions in the 34 patients in whom the pediatric colonoscope was used because of a fixed, angulated sigmoid included previous pelvic surgery in 22, pelvic radiation therapy in 2, pelvic endometriosis in 3, and two with previous sigmoid diverticulitis. Conclusions: The pediatric colonoscope, and particularly the newer Olympus PCF-100 colonoscope, is very useful in adult patients in whom it is not possible to traverse a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon or stricture using the standard adult colonoscope. This is predominantly a problem of female patients. Previous pelvic surgery may be an important causative factor in this regard. (Gastrointest Endosc 1996;44:675-8.)     

Success rate and duration of paediatric outpatient colonoscopy

BACKGROUND: The paediatric colonoscopy completion rates have rarely been reported. AIMS: We sought to evaluate colonoscopy completion rate and compare the rates using colonoscope versus enteroscope. METHODS: We prospectively investigated 60 patients who underwent colonoscopy between July 1999 and June 2001. The following data were collected: demographics, type of endoscope used, extent of colonoscopy, indication for procedure, histology, adverse events and time to reach the caecum and the terminal ileum. RESULTS: Sixty colonoscopies were performed during the study period, 30 with an enteroscope and 30 with a colonoscope. The caecum was reached in 56/60 (93%) and the terminal ileum in 50/60 (83%). An average time of 12.61 min (S.D. 7.3) was necessary to advance the instrument from the anus to the caecum, and additional 3.67 min (S.D. 3.62) to terminal ileum. There was no difference in the success rate between enteroscope and colonoscope. Six patients (10%) had definitive diagnosis established because a full colonoscopy was performed. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Paediatric colonoscopy to the caecum can be completed safely and expeditiously in more than 90% of procedures. Various types of instruments do not appear to influence completion rate. Full colonoscopy contributes to the establishment of a definitive diagnosis.     

Usefulness of a small-caliber, variable-stiffness colonoscope as a backup in patients with difficult or incomplete colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES: Although variable-stiffness colonoscopes have been developed, difficult or incomplete colonoscopies occasionally occur. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of a small-caliber, variable-stiffness colonoscope (scVSC) as a backup in patients with difficult or incomplete colonoscopies. METHODS: First, we retrospectively reviewed the cecal intubation rate of colonoscopies in which an adult standard colonoscope (AC) was immediately switched to an scVSC in all patients in whom a colonoscopy with an AC was incomplete. Second, 374 consecutive patients were randomized to undergo colonoscopy with a pediatric variable-stiffness colonoscope (PVSC, n = 123), AC (n = 125), or scVSC (n = 126). The scVSC was used by the same endoscopist to reattempt colonoscopy immediately after colonoscopy with a PVSC or an AC had been assessed as difficult or incomplete. The cecal intubation rate and time and the ancillary maneuvers used were evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-two (2.5%) of the 2,056 attempted colonoscopies with an AC did not reach the cecum. Fifty-one of the 52 patients (98.1%) had complete colonoscopies after the switch from the AC to the scVSC. The initial intubation rate and time were not statistically different among the groups: PVSC, 95% and 6.8 min; AC, 91% and 7.5 min; and scVSC, 98% and 8.2 min. Cecal intubation was achieved in all five patients (100%) and in 10 out of 11 (91%) patients, respectively, after the PVSC or AC was switched to the scVSC. CONCLUSIONS: The completion rate markedly improved after switching from an AC or PVSC to an scVSC in difficult or incomplete colonoscopies, although the scVSC does not appear to offer any distinct advantage over the AC or PVSC for routine colonoscopies.     

Total colonoscopy: is it always possible?

One-thousand three hundred fifty-one consecutive colonoscopies were performed in an office setting without fluoroscopy. Three different models of colonoscopies were utilized; all were manufactured by the Olympus Corporation of America, and included a videoendoscope, a CF-20L immersible OES-type instrument, and an older fiberoptic colonoscope, CFLB-3W. In all colonoscopies, the cecum was reached in 95.9%, even when an obstructing lesion or stenosis was present. Total intubation was performed in 97% of cases with the videoendoscope, 95.5% with the CF-20L, and 95.7% with the CFLB-3W. In a subgroup of 865 colonoscopies, total colonoscopy was performed in 98% of cases when obstructing lesions (carcinoma or stricture) were excluded from analysis. In this subgroup, total colonoscopy could not be performed in 16 patients because of colonic fixation, tortuosity, or for unknown anatomical reasons. Forty-five percent of this subgroup was female, but of the 16 patients in whom total colonoscopy was not possible, 15 were women, 5 of whom had a previous hysterectomy. We conclude that in the absence of any obstructing lesion, an expert can perform complete colonoscopy in 98% of examinations, and in 95% of all patients presenting for colonoscopy. Total colonoscopy may be more difficult in women than men, but a previous hysterectomy does not seem to adversely affect the ability to perform colonoscopy. The type of instrument used for colonoscopy does not impact on the ability to visualize the entire colon.     

Use of enteroscope without the overtube in incomplete colonoscopies

Abstract

Objectives: Colonoscopy is the gold standard diagnostic method for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Despite the progress in the endoscopy technology field, a small percentage of colonoscopies is still incomplete. The reasons for that are mostly associated with anatomic features, such as fixed, angulated, long and loopy colon, intra-abdominal adherences and female gender. To overcome such difficulties, the usefulness of scopes different from conventional adult colonoscope (CF), such as paediatric colonoscope (PCF), gastroscope (GIF), single and double balloon enteroscope (SBE and DBE, respectively), has been shown in literature. Our retrospective study aims to evaluate the caecal intubation rate using a SBE without the overtube in patients who previously underwent an incomplete procedure with a different scope.

Methods: Patients with a previous incomplete colonoscopy with CF, PCF or GIF were retrospectively enrolled through the analysis of a dedicated database. The enteroscope used was the Olympus Enteropro Single Balloon SiF-Q180 with no overtube. Complete colonoscopy was defined as successful caecal intubation.

Results: SBE was used to scope 47 adult patients, mostly female, and it led to a complete procedure in 91% of them. The most frequent reason for an incomplete procedure even with the use of SBE was a fixed and angulated colon.

Conclusions: Colonoscopy performed with SBE was safe and no adverse events during and/or after the procedure occurred. Our results suggest that SBE with no overtube is a useful and valid alternative to other type of scopes in difficult cases, especially those related to fixed/angulated colon and in female gender.     

Ultrathin colonoscope with a diameter of 9.8 mm for total colonoscopy

BACKGROUND: The pediatric colonoscope is superior to the standard colonoscope in some patients with a fixed, angulated colon. A colonoscope thinner than the pediatric one is thought to outperform even the pediatric colonoscope in such cases. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of an ultrathin colonoscope, 9.8 mm in diameter, comparing it with pediatric and standard colonoscopes. METHODS: Three types of colonoscopes were used: ultrathin, pediatric, and standard. A total of 287 consecutive patients were assigned to three groups: ultrathin (n=94), pediatric (n=98), and standard (n=95). First assessment was the ratio of cecal intubation and the reasons for unsuccessful colonoscopy. The second was the time to cecal intubation. RESULTS: Cecal intubation rates were not different among three groups (96% in each). The main reasons for failed colonoscopy were looping in the ultrathin group, and angulation or stricture in the pediatric and standard groups. Mean time to the cecum was slightly longer in the ultrathin group (6.5 minutes) than the pediatric group (5.6 minutes) and standard group (6.1 minutes), but there were no significant differences among three groups. CONCLUSION: Colonoscopy with the ultrathin colonoscope was as successful as with the pediatric and standard colonoscopes. The advantage of the ultrathin colonoscope might be notable in cases with stricture or severe angulation.     

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.     

Preoperative colonoscopy through the colonic stent in patients with colorectal cancer obstruction

AIM:To evaluate the feasibility of a preoperative colonoscopy through a self-expendable metallic stent(SEMS)and to identify the factors that affect complete colonoscopy.METHODS:A total of 48 patients who had SEMS placement because of acute malignant colonic obstruction underwent preoperative colonoscopy.After effective SEMS placement,patients who showed complete resolution of radiological findings and clinical signs of acute colon obstruction underwent a standard bowel preparation.Preoperative colonoscopy was then performed using a standard colonoscope.If the passage of colonoscope was not feasible gastroscope was used.After colonoscopy,cecal intubation time,grade of bowel preparation,tumor location,stent location,presence of synchronous polyps or cancer,damage to colonoscopy and bleeding,and stent migration after colonoscopy were recorded.RESULTS:Complete evaluation with colonoscope was possible in 30 patients(62.5%).In this group,adenoma was detected in 13 patients(43.3%).The factors that affected complete colonoscopy were also analyzed:Tumor location at an angle;stent placement at an angle;and stent expansion diameter,which affected complete colonoscopy significantly.However in multivariate analysis,stent expansion diameter was the only significant factor that affected complete colonoscopy.Complete evaluation using additional gastroscope was feasible in 42 patients(87.5%).CONCLUSION:Preoperative colonoscopy through the colonic stent using only conventional colonoscope was unfavorable.The narrow expansion diameter of the stent may predict unfavorable outcome.In such a case,using small caliber scope should be considered and may expect successful outcome.     

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.     

Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for routine colonoscopy in women who have undergone hysterectomy

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy can be difficult in some women who have undergone hysterectomy, which can be associated with a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon caused by postoperative pelvic adhesions. Our goal was to determine whether colonoscopy is easier and more comfortable for women after hysterectomy when performed with a pediatric colonoscope, which is thinner in diameter and more flexible than a standard "adult" colonoscope. METHODS: One hundred women with a history of hysterectomy undergoing outpatient colonoscopy were randomized in unblinded fashion to colonoscopy with a standard colonoscope (CF-100L or CF-Q140L, Olympus) or with a pediatric colonoscope (PCF-100, Olympus). All procedures were performed by a faculty endoscopist and timed. After examination, the endoscopist graded procedure difficulty, and patients were given a questionnaire that assessed their experience. RESULTS: The cecum was intubated more frequently in the pediatric colonoscope group than in the standard colonoscope group (96.1% vs. 71.4%, p < 0.001). Success increased in the standard colonoscope group to 89.8% when the pediatric colonoscope was used to complete the examination. There were no differences in the two groups in terms of mean total procedure times (21.4 minutes vs. 22.6 minutes), mean doses of meperidine administered (57 mg both groups), mean doses of midazolam administered (1.5 mg vs. 1.7 mg), scales of procedure difficulty as graded by the endoscopists, and comfort scales as graded by patients. For the cases in which the cecum was intubated, the mean time to reach the cecum (11.7 minutes for the pediatric colonoscope group vs. 12.7 minutes for the adult) was similar. CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric colonoscope is a reasonable choice for colonoscopy in women who have had a hysterectomy. Alternatively, if the endoscopist elects to start the procedure with a standard colonoscope, it is helpful to have a pediatric colonoscope available for use should a fixed, angulated sigmoid colon be encountered that cannot be easily or safely traversed with the standard colonoscope.     

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.     

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.     

Usefulness of pediatric colonoscopes in adult colonoscopy

Use of small diameter, extraflexible pediatric colonoscopes has proved to be valuable in adult endoscopy practice, not only for passing strictures and stomas but also where either fixation due to diverticular disease or postoperative adhesions, or unavoidably painful looping made passage of adult colonoscopes impossible. In 70 of 78 (92%) of the cases where the adult colonoscope could not be passed through the sigmoid colon by an expert endoscopist, the pediatric colonoscope passed through, often very easily. Fifteen of these patients were considered to have been saved surgery by successful passage. The "failure" rate for all colonoscopy examinations was only 2%; this low failure rate was attributable to the use of pediatric instruments whenever passage through the sigmoid colon proved to be impossible with standard colonoscopes. In our opinion every unit performing frequent colonoscopies should have a pediatric colonoscope available for selected adult patients as well as for use in children.     

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.     

First clinical results with a real time, electronic imager as an aid to colonoscopy.

The early clinical results are described of a real time, electromagnetic imaging system as an aid to colonoscopy. After gaining experience with the use of the system, one experienced endoscopist was randomised to perform consecutive colonoscopies either with (n = 29) or without (n = 26) the imager view. All procedures were recorded on computer disk and replayed for retrospective analysis. Total colonoscopy was achieved in all patients except one (imager view not available). Comparing intubation time and duration of loop formation per patient, there was no significant difference between the two study groups. The number of attempts taken to straighten the colonoscope pre patient, however, was less when the endoscopist was able to see the imager view, p = 0.03. Hand pressure was also more effective when the endoscopist and endoscopy assistant could see the imager display, p = 0.02. Preliminary experience suggests that real time, electronic imaging of colonoscopy is safe, effective, and will improve the accuracy of the procedure.     

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.     

A retrospective analysis of cecal barotrauma caused by colonoscope air flow and pressure

BACKGROUND: This study addressed the question of whether barotrauma during colonoscopy is sufficient to rupture the colon. METHODS: A total of 3000 colonoscopies were retrospectively analyzed, and the colonoscopes used for these procedures were evaluated in an in vitro analysis. Air pressure at the tip of the colonoscopes and air flow through the instruments were measured. The equation F=F MAX-P TIP/R was used to graph flow values (F) from the maximum measured flow (F MAX), the calculated resistance to air flow offered by the colonoscope (R), and the air pressure observed at the colonoscope tip (P TIP ). RESULTS: Four perforations occurred during 1500 consecutive colonoscopies performed with equipment from one manufacturer (Pentax Precision Instrument Corp., Orangeburg, NY) whereas, no perforation occurred during 1500 consecutive colonoscopies performed with equipment from another manufacturer (Olympus America Corp., Melville, NY) ( p < or =0.06). The Pentax colonoscopes used in patients with barotrauma-induced cecal perforations insufflated air at a rate greater than 1.46 L/m at 80 mmHg intraluminal pressure. Olympus colonoscopes did not. In vitro maximum air-flow rates of 2 L/m at a tip pressure of 0 mm Hg separated the Pentax from the Olympus instruments ( p <0.022). Conclusions Colonoscopes with maximum flow rates of less than 2 L/m at 0 mmHg tip pressure have insufficient flow capacity to generate flows above 1.46 L/m at 80 mmHg intraluminal pressure and thus may protect patients from cecal barotrauma.     

A randomized controlled trial in a training institution comparing a pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope, a pediatric colonoscope, and an adult colonoscope

BACKGROUND: There are few comparative data on the efficacy of different colonoscopes. This study compared the efficacy of a new pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope with that of standard pediatric and adult colonoscopes in the performance of routine colonoscopy. METHODS: Three hundred sixty-three consecutive patients were randomized to undergo colonoscopy with a pediatric variable stiffness (n = 122), pediatric (n = 114), or adult colonoscope (n = 127). Primary outcomes recorded were minutes to the cecum and completeness of the examination. Secondary outcomes included patient tolerance, use of abdominal compression, and endoscopists' assessment of the difficulty of the procedure. RESULTS: Cecal intubation rates were not statistically different between the groups: variable stiffness (94.3%), pediatric (96.5%), and adult (89.8%) (p = 0.099). There was no significant difference in mean insertion time, patient tolerance, use of abdominal compression, or endoscopists' global assessment or examination difficulty between groups. Overall, the initial completion rate of 93% increased to 97% on switching to a different colonoscope. Colonoscopy was unsuccessful more often and was more time consuming in women who had undergone hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: The variable stiffness colonoscope performs well, but does not appear to offer any distinct advantage over standard pediatric or adult colonoscopes for routine colonoscopy. Further study may identify subgroups of patients that benefit from this new technology.