Factors that influence cecal intubation rate during colonoscopy in deeply sedated patients

Background and Aim: The technical performance of colonoscopy performed in deeply sedated patients differs from that performed without sedation or under minimal to moderate sedation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors affecting cecal intubation during colonoscopy performed under deep sedation. Methods: A total of 5352 consecutive subjects who underwent a screening colonoscopy as part of a health check‐up between January 2008 and December 2008 at an academic hospital were reviewed. All endoscopies were performed with deep sedation using combination propofol or propofol alone. Data collected included characteristics of the patients (age, gender, body mass index, bowel habits, history of abdominal or pelvic surgery, quality of bowel preparation, and presence/absence of colonic diverticula) and characteristics of the colonoscopists (experience level, colonoscopy procedure volume, and instrument handling method). These factors were analyzed to evaluate their impact on cecal intubation rates. Results: The crude cecal intubation rate was 98% and the adjusted cecal intubation rate was 98.3%. The mean cecal intubation time was 5.6 ± 3.2 min. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patient age greater than 60 years, constipation, poor colon preparation and a two‐person colonoscopy procedure were independently associated with lower cecal intubation rates. Conclusions: Colonoscopy performed under deep sedation by experienced colonoscopists results in high cecal intubation rates. Among the significant patient‐related predictors influencing the cecal intubation, the quality of the bowel preparation was the only modifiable factor. When performed by experienced hands, the one‐person method was associated with higher cecal intubation rates than the two‐person method.     

Relationship of Colonoscopy Completion Rates and Endoscopist Features

The success rate for reaching the cecum has been widely discussed as an indicatorof technical expertise for colonoscopy. However, few studies have addressed the impact of endoscopist-specific parameters on cecal intubation rates. The aim of this study wasto characterize the relationship between endoscopist-specific parameters (age, gender, experience level, annual procedure volume, insertion and withdrawal times) and cecal intubation rates for colonoscopy. Procedural data from all colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists at the outpatient endoscopy unit of Rochester Methodist Hospital, Minnesota, between January and December 2003 were reviewed. Procedural data of 45 endoscopists who performed 17,100 colonoscopies over the study period were analyzed. The average cecal intubation rate was 93.9% (SD, 2.9%). Higher experience level (> 9 years [median]) was significantly predictive of a cecal intubation rate > 94% (OR = 3.43; 95% CI, 1.03–12.29; P = 0.04). Although higher procedure volume was not predictive of higher colonoscopy completion rates overall, when analysis was confined to the junior faculty members (< 5 years experience), completion rates for those endoscopists doing > 200 per year (92.5%) was significantly higher than for those doing < 200 per year (88.5%; P = 0.04). Our observations suggest that cecal intubation rates increase with increasing endoscopist experience. Moreover, among junior endoscopists, an annual volume of at least 200 procedures appears to be required to maintain adequate competence. Future prospective studies should provide data to support consensus guidelines recommending minimum annual procedure numbers required for maintenance of endoscopic competence among trained endoscopists.     

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.     

Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy

AIM: To study the significance of cap-fitted colonoscopy in improving cecal intubation time and polyp detection rate. METHODS: This study was a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted from March 2008 to February 2009 in a tertiary referral hospital at Sydney. The primary end point was cecal intubation time and the secondary endpoint was polyp detection rate. Consecutive cases of total colonoscopy over a 1-year period were recruited. Randomization into either standard colonoscopy (SC) or cap-assist...     

Quality in colonoscopy: cecal intubation first, then what?

In 2002, the U.S. MultiSociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer proposed multiple quality indicators for use in the continuous quality improvement (CQI) process for colonoscopy. The quality indicators were not prioritized for implementation in clinical practice. This editorial reviews evidence suggesting that after cecal intubation rates, two quality indicators should be the priorities for the CQI process for colonoscopy: (1) measurement of individual endoscopists' adenoma detection rates and (2) recommended intervals for postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopy.     

An adequate level of training for technical competence in screening and diagnostic colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter evaluation of the learning curve

BACKGROUND: Various training programs in colonoscopy recommend that trainees should perform at least 100 to 200 procedures to be considered technically competent at diagnostic colonoscopy. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine the adequate level of training for technical competence in screening and diagnostic colonoscopy. DESIGN: A prospective multicenter trial. SETTING: Fifteen tertiary care academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Over 8 months we prospectively evaluated the procedures of 24 first-year GI fellows in 15 tertiary care academic medical centers. A total of 4351 colonoscopies were assessed prospectively with variable clinical factors. INTERVENTION: Cecal intubation was documented by photographing the identified cecal landmarks, including the appendiceal orifice and the ileocecal valve. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Acquisition of competence (success rate) was evaluated for colonoscopic training on the basis of 2 objective criteria: (1) adjusted completion rate (>90%) and (2) cecal intubation time (<20 minutes). RESULTS: The overall success rate was 83.5% (3635/4351). The mean cecal intubation time was 9.23 +/- 4.63 minutes. The success rate significantly improved and reached the requisite standard of competence after 150 procedures (71.5%, 82.6%, 91.3%, 94.4%, 98.4%, and 98.7%, respectively, for every 50 consecutive blocks). The polyp detection rate did not improve significantly during the 8 months and was not correlated with the learning curve. In addition, mean time to cecal intubation decreased significantly, from 11.16 to 8.39 minutes, after 150 procedures. Logistic regression analysis found that prolonged cecal intubation was caused by the following factors: elderly patients, female sex, low body mass index, poor bowel preparation, poor American Society of Anesthesiologists status, abdominal pain as an indication, instructor's supervision, and low case volume. LIMITATIONS: We did not record final pathologic reports of detected polyps and withdrawal time. CONCLUSIONS: Competence in technically efficient screening and diagnostic colonoscopy generally requires experience with more than 150 cases. Also, factors associated with prolonged cecal intubation for typical trainees did not differ from those for experienced colonoscopists.     

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.     

Colonoscopy: practice variation among 69 hospital-based endoscopists

BACKGROUND: The medical profession, payers, and patients are interested increasingly in the quality of endoscopic procedures, including colonoscopy. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has recommended "report cards" by which endoscopists may keep track of certain key elements of their practice including indications, findings, duration, technical end points, complications, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: The GI-Trac endoscopy reporting database includes many of the data points recommended by ASGE for report cards. Seven hospital centers in North America have been collecting data prospectively for varying periods since 1994. These data were aggregated and analyzed by individual endoscopist. A total of 69 endoscopists performed 17,868 colonoscopies. RESULTS: Twelve percent of the endoscopists reported that more than 20% of procedures they performed were completely normal. The average time taken by 27% of endoscopists was more than 40 minutes (without trainees involved), and only 55% achieved a cecal intubation rate of over 90%; for 9% the rate was less than 80%. Complication rates were too low for individual comparisons. CONCLUSION: These data provide an idea of colonoscopy performance by individual endoscopists in mainly academic centers. Incorporating all recommended data elements in future reporting databases will contribute to meaningful bench marking and to quality improvement efforts.     

Factors predictive of difficult colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Prediction of a technically difficult colonoscopy may influence patient selection and procedure scheduling. Identification of predictive factors may be difficult because a common endpoint used to evaluate the success of colonoscopy is intubation of the cecum, which is usually achieved. The goal of this study was to examine the feasibility of using an alternative measure, time required for cecal intubation, to identify factors that can impact performance of colonoscopy. METHODS: The time required for cecal intubation was prospectively recorded for 802 consecutive outpatient colonoscopies performed by 7 experienced gastroenterologists. Patient data collected included height, weight, age, bowel habits, surgical history, and findings at colonoscopy. Forty-seven examinations that were stopped because of disease or unacceptable bowel preparation were excluded. The impact of the patient characteristics of the remaining sample of 755 patients on the median time required for cecal intubation for men and women was examined. RESULTS: Older age and female gender, body mass index < or =25.0 (regardless of gender), diverticular disease in women, and a history of constipation or reported laxative use in men were predictors of difficult colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: By using median time required for cecal intubation, several patient characteristics were identified that may predict technical difficulty at colonoscopy. These findings have implications for practice and teaching.     

Quality indicators in pediatric colonoscopy: an Australian tertiary center experience

Objectives: Quality indicators for colonoscopy in adults are largely driven by colorectal cancer screening, and include cecal intubation rates, with rates of >90% recommended. In contrast, colorectal cancer is rare in childhood, with paucity of data on relevant quality indicators for pediatric colonoscopy. It is also unclear whether high rates of cecal intubation are achievable in small children. Our aim was to audit all colonoscopies performed in a tertiary pediatric center to examine clinical indications for procedure, completeness of examination with cecal and ileal intubation, significant findings, and complications.

Methods: Retrospective review of colonoscopies performed between November 2011 and October 2015 was undertaken.

Results: Total colonoscopy was performed in 652 patients, 53% male, with median age 13.0 (range 0.4–18.2) years. The most common indications for colonoscopy were assessment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) 57.9% (378/652), rectal bleeding 10% (68/652) and abdominal pain 10% (68/652). Trainees performed 69.8% (452/652) of procedures. Quality of bowel preparation was mentioned in 63% (410/652), of which 22% (90/410) were considered inadequate. Cecal intubation rate was 96.3% (628/652) and ileal intubation rate was 92.4% (603/652). Extent of procedure was confirmed in 99.2% of patients with photographs and/or ileal biopsy. Poor quality of bowel preparation (p?=?.001) and age <5years (p?=?.007) were inversely related to successful ileal intubation.

Conclusions: High rates of cecal and ileal intubation are achievable in pediatric colonoscopy. Ileal intubation should be considered a quality indicator since the main indicator for pediatric colonoscopy is to investigate IBD.     

Water intubation method can reduce patients' pain and sedation rate in colonoscopy: A meta‐analysis

Several randomized controlled trials (RCT) have shown that water infusion in lieu of air insufflation reduces sedation rate and pain score and increases cecal intubation rate in colonoscopy. The aim of the present study was to confirm the beneficial effects of the water intubation method over the air method. Electronic databases were searched to identify RCT reporting colonoscopy detection using the water method. The pooled data of sedation rate, pain score and other procedure‐related outcomes were analyzed. Then, 15 full‐text articles were selected and assessed. Nine trials with high‐quality scores were enrolled into this meta‐analysis including a total of 1414 participants. Pooled odds ratio (OR) of sedation rate was 0.392 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.288–0.533, P = 0.000). Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) of pain score was ?1.543 (95% CI: ?2.107–?1.069,P = 0.000). Pooled OR of cecal intubation rate was 1.90 (95% CI: 1.29–2.82, P = 0.001). Pooled OR of polyp detection rate and adenoma detection rate were 0.805 (95% CI: 0.606–1.069, P = 0.134) and 0.913 (95% CI: 0.681–1.223, P = 0.168), respectively. Pooled WMD of cecal intubation time was 0.701 (95% CI: ?0.486–1.889, P = 0.247). This meta‐analysis confirmed that the water method significantly reduced sedation rate and degree of pain without decreasing cecal intubation rate and disease detection rate and without requiring more cecal intubation time, suggesting that the novel water method is better than the conventional air method in colonoscopy detection.     

Failure of colonoscopy to detect colorectal cancer: evaluation of 47 cases in 20 hospitals

Background: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for the detection of colon polyps and cancers, but failed detections can occur and the reasons are incompletely understood. Methods: During a retrospective evaluation of the sensitivity of barium enema and colonoscopy in 20 Indiana Hospitals, we encountered 47 cases of colorectal cancer in which a colonoscopy performed within 3 years of the diagnosis had not detected the cancer. Cases were reviewed for location of tumor, extenuating factors, pathologic features, delay in diagnosis from failed detection, and who performed the examination. Results: Failed detection was more likely when colonoscopy was performed by a nongastroenterologist than a gastroenterologist (odds ratio 5:36, 95% CI [2.94,9.77]). Twenty-seven cancers were “missed,” and 20 were estimated to be not reached. However, the location of missed tumors and a general absence of adequate documentation of cecal intubation suggested that some cecal and ascending colon cancers recorded as missed may actually have been not reached. Variation in sensitivity among gastroenterologists suggested that meticulous examination is also important in maximizing sensitivity. Conclusions: These cases suggest several factors that might improve the quality and sensitivity of colonoscopy: (1) examiners should receive adequate training, (2) cecal intubation rates should be high, (3) cecal intubation should be verified by specific landmarks in all cases, (4) failure to reach the cecum should be followed by prompt barium enema, and (5) meticulous examination would appear to improve sensitivity for cancer detection. (Gastrointest Endosc 1997;45:451-5.)     

Point-of-care, peer-comparator colonoscopy practice audit: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Quality Program--Endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care practice audits allow documentation of procedural outcomes to support quality improvement in endoscopic practice.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a colonoscopists’ practice audit tool that provides point-of-care data collection and peer-comparator feedback.

METHODS

A prospective, observational colonoscopy practice audit was conducted in academic and community endoscopy units for unselected patients undergoing colonoscopy. Anonymized colonoscopist, patient and practice data were collected using touchscreen smart-phones with automated data upload for data analysis and review by participants. The main outcome measures were the following colonoscopy quality indicators: colonoscope insertion and withdrawal times, bowel preparation quality, sedation, immediate complications and polypectomy, and biopsy rates.

RESULTS

Over a span of 16 months, 62 endoscopists reported on 1279 colonoscopy procedures. The mean cecal intubation rate was 94.9% (10th centile 84.2%). The mean withdrawal time was 8.8 min and, for nonpolypectomy colonoscopies, 41.9% of colonoscopists reported a mean withdrawal time of less than 6 min. Polypectomy was performed in 37% of colonoscopies. Independent predictors of polypectomy included the following: endoscopy unit type, patient age, interval since previous colonoscopy, bowel preparation quality, stable inflammatory bowel disease, previous colon polyps and withdrawal time. Withdrawal times of less than 6 min were associated with lower polyp removal rates (mean difference −11.3% [95% CI −2.8% to −19.9%]; P=0.01).

DISCUSSION

Cecal intubation rates exceeded 90% and polypectomy rates exceeded 30%, but withdrawal times were frequently shorter than recommended. There are marked practice variations consistent with previous observations.

CONCLUSION

Real-time, point-of-care practice audits with prompt, confidential access to outcome data provide a basis for targeted educational programs to improve quality in colonoscopy practice.     

The Norwegian Gastronet project: Continuous quality improvement of colonoscopy in 14 Norwegian centres

OBJECTIVE: The burden on colonoscopy capacity is considerable and expected to increase further as colorectal cancer screening programmes gain a foothold in Europe. In this situation, it is particularly important to evaluate the quality of the service given. In this article we present our first year of experience with a quality network of endoscopy centres in Norway (Gastronet). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire focusing on caecal intubation rate and pain was completed by the endoscopist (on site) and patient (on the day after the examination). Fourteen centres participated with registration of 7370 colonoscopies by 73 endoscopists. RESULTS: There was 100% endoscopist participation, 87% coverage of colonoscopies and an estimated 76% questionnaire coverage of the patient population. Overall caecal intubation rate was 91%, range 83% to 97% between centres (p < 0.001). Patients reporting severe pain during colonoscopy differed from 2 to 24% between centres (p < 0.001). Variations could only partly be explained by differences in procedure practice (sedation, CO2 insufflation). For individual endoscopists, improvement after feedback on performance was restricted to the group of endoscopists having contributed with only 50-99 registered colonoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: In quality assurance programmes we recommend a limited number of variables for registration in order to secure high compliance by endoscopists and patients. One year of experience with Gastronet disclosed a satisfactory overall caecal intubation rate, but considerable variation between centres in practice and ability to offer painless colonoscopy. This suggests a need for formal, centralized training of colonoscopists or the development of quality standards for colonoscopy training and practice.     

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.     

Validation of a colonoscopy simulation model for skills assessment

OBJECTIVE: The purpose is to provide initial validation of a novel simulation model's fidelity and ability to assess competence in colonoscopy skills. METHODS: In a prospective, cross-sectional design, each of 39 endoscopists (13 staff, 13 second year fellows, and 13 novices) performed a colonoscopy on a novel bovine simulation model. Staff endoscopists also completed a survey examining different aspects of the model's realism as compared to human colonoscopy. The groups' simulation performances were compared. Additionally, individual performances were correlated to patient-based performance data. RESULTS: Median model realism evaluation scores were favorable for nearly all parameters evaluated with mucosa appearance, endoscopic view, and paradoxical motion parameters receiving the highest scores. During simulation procedures, each group outperformed the less experienced groups in all parameters evaluated. Specifically, median cecal intubation times were: staff 226 s (IQR [interquartile range] 179-273), fellows 340 s (282-568), and novices 1,027 s (970-1,122) (P < 0.05). Median total procedure times on the model were: staff 468 s (416-501), fellows 527 s (459-824), and novices 1,350 s (1,318-1,428) (P < 0.05). Finally, individual cecal intubation times on the simulation model had a very high correlation to their respective patient-based times (r = 0.764). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this model possesses a favorable degree of realism and is able to easily differentiate users based on their level of colonoscopy experience. More impressive, however, is the strong correlation between individual's simulated intubation times and actual patient-based colonoscopy data. In light of these findings, we speculate that this model has potential to be an effective tool for assessment of colonoscopic competence.     

Use of the Endocuff during routine colonoscopy examination improves adenoma detection: A meta-analysis

AIM To perform meta-analysis of the use of Endocuff during average risk screening colonoscopy.METHODS Scopus, Cochrane databases, MEDLINE/Pub Med, and CINAHL were searched in April 2016. Abstracts from Digestive Disease Week, United European Gastroenterology, and the American College of Gastroenterology meeting were also searched from 2004-2015. Studies comparing EC-assisted colonoscopy(EAC) to standard colonoscopy, for any indication, were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted by using the Mantel-Haenszel or DerS imonian and Laird models with the odds ratio(OR) to assess adenoma detection, cecal intubation rate, and complications performed. RESULTS Nine studies(n = 5624 patients) were included in the analysis. Compared to standard colonoscopy, procedures performed with EC had higher frequencies for adenoma(OR = 1.49, 95%CI: 1.23-1.80; P = 0.03), and sessile serrated adenomas detection(OR = 2.34 95%CI: 1.63-3.36; P 0.001). There was no significant difference in cecal intubation rates between the EACgroup and standard colonoscopy(OR = 1.26, 95%CI: 0.70-2.27, I2 = 0%; P = 0.44). EAC was associated with a higher risk of complications, most commonly being superficial mucosal injury without higher frequency for perforation.CONCLUSION The use of an EC on colonoscopy appears to improve pre-cancerous polyp detection without any difference in cecal intubation rates compared to standard colonoscopy.     

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.     

Hood Colonoscopy in Trainees: A Useful Adjunct to Improve the Performance

Background

The use of a transparent hood to improve colonoscopic performance has recently been proposed.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether using the hood might improve the cecal intubation rate, cecal intubation time, number of attempts needed to intubate the ileo-cecal valve, and polyp detection rate in trainees.

Methods

Patients undergoing colonoscopy (n = 378) were randomized in two groups, one studied with hood colonoscopy (n = 179) and the other (n = 199) with standard examination.

Results

No differences were found between hood and standard colonoscopy with respect to cecal intubation rate (95 vs 92 %), whereas hood colonoscopy significantly shortened the cecal intubation time, the number of attempts needed to intubate the ileo-cecal valve, and the overall polyp detection rate (p < 0.01 for all these variables).

Conclusions

Hood colonoscopy might represent a useful adjunct to standard colonoscopy, especially improving the performance of endoscopic trainees.