|
1
|
Jiao TX, Hu Y, Guo SB. Clinical value of sigmoid colon water exchange colonoscopy: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Sci Rep 2023; 13:13704. [PMID: 37608083 PMCID: PMC10444785 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-40706-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2023] [Indexed: 08/24/2023] Open
Abstract
This prospective randomized controlled trial investigated the clinical value of sigmoid colon water exchange (SWE) colonoscopy by comparing it with air insufflation (AI) colonoscopy in terms of the patient's pain score, insertion time, and screening quality. Consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy without sedation were randomized into an AI group (n = 267) or an SWE group (n = 255). Patient characteristics, history of abdominal or pelvic surgery, maximum pain score, insertion time, cecal intubation rate, polyp detection rate, and the need for maneuvers were recorded. There was no significant between-group difference in insertion time, cecal intubation rate, assisted maneuvers (abdominal pressure, changing patients' position), or polyp detection rate (P > 0.05). The mean maximum pain score was significantly lower in the SWE group than in the AI group. (3.57 ± 2.01 vs. 4.69 ± 1.83, P < 0.001). For patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery and those who were overweight (body mass index > 24), the maximum pain scores were lower in the SWE group than in the AI group (3.67 ± 1.95 vs. 4.88 ± 1.80, P < 0.001; 3.40 ± 1.96 vs. 4.79 ± 1.97, P < 0.001, respectively). SWE colonoscopy can significantly reduce abdominal pain with non-inferior screening quality and does not increase insertion time.Trial registration number: ChiCTR2200059057 (date April 23, 2022).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tian-Xiao Jiao
- Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, 222 Zhongshan Road, Dalian, 116011, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China
- Department of Gastroenterology, Dalian Friendship Hospital, Dalian, 116011, Liaoning, People's Republic of China
| | - Yang Hu
- Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, 222 Zhongshan Road, Dalian, 116011, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China
| | - Shi-Bin Guo
- Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, 222 Zhongshan Road, Dalian, 116011, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Leng F, Ye CG, Dai HM, Hu N, Zhu XJ, Fang J, Xiang Y, Yang L. Clinical effects of left-colon water exchange colonoscopy vs conventional air-insufflation colonoscopy. Shijie Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2021; 29:972-976. [DOI: 10.11569/wcjd.v29.i16.972] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The left colon is difficult to detect via conventional air-injection colonoscopy, and patients may have obvious discomfort during intubation. Studies have reported that water exchange technology can significantly reduce the pain and discomfort of patients during endoscopy. However, there are still few studies comparing the clinical effects of left-colon water exchange (WE) colonoscopy with conventional air-insufflation (AI) colonoscopy.
AIM To compare the clinical effects of left-colon WE colonoscopy and conventional AI colonoscopy.
METHODS Consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy at our hospital from June 2020 to December 2020 were collected and randomly divided into either a left-colon WE colonoscopy group or a conventional AI colonoscopy group at a ratio of 1:1. The success rate of ileocecal insertion, time to cecal insertion, time to colonoscope withdrawal, adenoma detection rate (ADR), visual analogue scale (VAS) score of pain, and rate of complications were recorded in the two groups.
RESULTS A total of 276 patients were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 139 cases in the left-colon WE colonoscopy group and 137 cases in the conventional AI colonoscopy group. There were no statistical differences in the success rate of ileocecal insertion, time to colonoscope withdrawal, or adenoma detection rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, time to cecal insertion was significantly shorter (4.6 min vs 5.3 min, P < 0.05) and VAS score was significantly lower (2.7 vs 3.1, P < 0.05) in the left-colon WE colonoscopy group than in the conventional AI colonoscopy group. No examination-related complications such as perforation occurred in either group.
CONCLUSION Compared with conventional AI colonoscopy, left-colon WE colonoscopy significantly shortens the time to ileocecal insertion and reduces the pain and discomfort of the patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fang Leng
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Chang-Gen Ye
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Hua-Mei Dai
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Na Hu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Xiao-Jia Zhu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Jun Fang
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Yang Xiang
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| | - Li Yang
- Department of Gastroenterology, Third People's Hospital of Jingdezhen, Jingdezhen 333000, Jiangxi Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Adenoma and Advanced Adenoma Detection Rates of Water Exchange, Endocuff, and Cap Colonoscopy: A Network Meta-Analysis with Pooled Data of Randomized Controlled Trials. Dig Dis Sci 2021; 66:1175-1188. [PMID: 32451757 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-020-06324-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2020] [Accepted: 05/04/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS A network meta-analysis showed that low-cost optimization of existing resources was as effective as distal add-on devices in increasing adenoma detection rate (ADR). We assessed the impacts of water exchange (WE), Endocuff, and cap colonoscopy on ADR and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR). We hypothesized that WE may be superior at improving ADR and AADR. METHODS The literature was searched for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported ADR as an outcome and included the keywords colonoscopy, and water exchange, Endocuff, or cap. We performed traditional network meta-analyses with random effect models comparing ADR and AADR of each method using air insufflation (AI) as the control and reported the odds ratios with 95% confidence interval. Performances were ranked based on P-score. RESULTS Twenty-one RCTs met inclusion criteria. Fourteen RCTs also reported AADR. Both WE [1.46 (1.20-1.76)] and Endocuff [1.39 (1.17-1.66)] significantly increase ADR, while cap has no impact on ADR [1.00 (0.82-1.22)]. P-scores for WE (0.88), Endocuff (0.79), cap (0.17), and AI (0.17) suggest WE has the highest ADR. WE [1.38 (1.12-1.70)], but not Endocuff [0.96 (0.76-1.21)] or cap [1.06 (0.85-1.32)], significantly increases AADR. P-scores for WE (0.98), cap (0.50), AI (0.31), and Endocuff (0.21) suggest WE is more effective at increasing AADR. The results did not change after adjusting for age, proportion of males, and withdrawal time. CONCLUSION WE may be the modality of choice to maximally improve ADR and AADR.
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Lin L, Huang P. Transparent cap‐assisted, water‐exchange colonoscopy in previous incomplete difficult colonoscopy patients: A retrospective study. ADVANCES IN DIGESTIVE MEDICINE 2020. [DOI: 10.1002/aid2.13175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Lien‐Fu Lin
- Division of Hepato‐Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine Tungs' Taichung Metro‐Harbor Hospital Taichung Taiwan
| | - Pi‐Teh Huang
- Division of Hepato‐Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine Tungs' Taichung Metro‐Harbor Hospital Taichung Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Anderson JC. Use of Total Underwater Colonoscopy to Navigate Endoscopic Challenges. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 18:1427-1430. [PMID: 32109632 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.02.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2020] [Revised: 02/05/2020] [Accepted: 02/14/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph C Anderson
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont; The Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth Medical, Hanover, New Hampshire; Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut.
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Lee E, Shafer LA, Walker JR, Waldman C, Michaud V, Yang C, Bernstein CN, Hathout L, Park J, Sisler J, Wittmeier K, Restall G, Singh H. Information experiences, needs, and preferences of colonoscopy patients: A pre-colonoscopy survey. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019; 98:e15738. [PMID: 31096537 PMCID: PMC6531243 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000015738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Better pre-colonoscopy education may lead to improved bowel preparation, decreased anxiety, and a willingness to go direct-to-colonoscopy. We assessed information experiences, needs, and preferences of patients undergoing colonoscopy.A self-administered survey was distributed between 08/2015 and 06/2016 to patients in Winnipeg, Canada when they attended an outpatient colonoscopy. The amount, type, helpfulness, and satisfaction with information provided were analyzed. Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to assess predictors of satisfaction with various aspects of the information received, as well as overall satisfaction with the provided information.Although the majority of the 1580 respondents were satisfied with the information they received, only 68% of respondents coming for a repeat colonoscopy and 59% of those coming for first colonoscopy perceived receiving just the right amount of information from their endoscopy doctor. One quarter or less of the respondents indicated they received just the right amount of information from any source other than their colonoscopy doctor. 38% coming for a first colonoscopy and 44% coming for a repeat colonoscopy indicated they received no information from their family physician. Those coming for their first colonoscopy had a lower average score (9.7 vs 11.1; P < .001) for amount of information received (scale 0-15), were less satisfied with the information they received (P = .005) and found the information to be less clear (P = .004).Many patients going for colonoscopy in a large urban practice are inadequately informed about the various aspects of the procedure and it is worse for those going for first rather than repeat colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leigh Anne Shafer
- Department of Internal Medicine
- Department of Community Health Sciences
- IBD Clinical and Research Centre
| | - John R. Walker
- IBD Clinical and Research Centre
- Department of Clinical Health Psychology
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Jason Park
- Department of Surgery
- CancerCare Manitoba, Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Registry
| | - Jeff Sisler
- CancerCare Manitoba, Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Registry
- Department of Family Medicine
| | - Kristy Wittmeier
- Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences
| | - Gayle Restall
- Department of Occupational Therapy, College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Harminder Singh
- Department of Internal Medicine
- Department of Community Health Sciences
- IBD Clinical and Research Centre
- CancerCare Manitoba, Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Registry
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Comparing adenoma and polyp miss rates for total underwater colonoscopy versus standard CO 2: a randomized controlled trial using a tandem colonoscopy approach. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89:591-598. [PMID: 30367879 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.09.046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2018] [Accepted: 09/30/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Although water exchange may improve adenoma detection compared with CO2, it is unclear whether water is a better medium to fill the lumen during withdrawal and visualize the mucosa. Total underwater colonoscopy (TUC) involves the use of water exchange with the air valve off during insertion followed by the inspection of the mucosa under water. Our goal was to compare miss rates for TUC with standard CO2 for polyps and adenomas using a tandem colonoscopy design. METHODS We randomized participants to undergo tandem colonoscopies using TUC or CO2 first. In TUC, water exchange was performed during insertion, and withdrawal was performed under water. For the CO2 colonoscopy, both insertion and withdrawal were performed with CO2. The main outcomes were miss rates for polyps and adenomas for the first examination calculated as the number of additional polyps/adenomas detected during the second examination divided by the total number of polyps/adenomas detected for both examinations. Inspection times were calculated by subtracting the time for polypectomy, and care was taken to keep the times equal for both examinations. RESULTS A total of 121 participants were randomized with 61 having CO2 first. The overall miss rate for polyps was higher for the TUC-first group (81/237; 34%) compared with the CO2-first cohort (57/264; 22%) (P = .002). In addition, the overall miss rate for all adenomas was higher for the TUC-first group (52/146; 36%) compared with the CO2 group (37/159; 23%) (P = .025). However, 1 of the 3 endoscopists had higher polyp/adenoma miss rates for CO2, but these were not statistically significant differences. The insertion time was longer for TUC than for CO2. After adjusting for times, participant characteristics, and bowel preparation, the miss rate for polyps was higher for TUC than for CO2. CONCLUSIONS We found that TUC had an overall higher polyp and adenoma miss rate than colonoscopy performed with CO2, and TUC took longer to perform. However, TUC may benefit some endoscopists, an issue that requires further study. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03231917.).
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Xu X, Ni D, Lu Y, Huang X. Diagnostic application of water exchange colonoscopy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Int Med Res 2019; 47:515-527. [PMID: 30632431 PMCID: PMC6381515 DOI: 10.1177/0300060518819626] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Few well-designed studies have investigated water exchange colonoscopy (WE). We performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the clinical utility of WE based on high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to compare the impacts of WE, water immersion colonoscopy (WI), and gas-insufflation colonoscopy. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Elsevier, CNKI, VIP, and Wan Fang Data for RCTs on WE. We analyzed the results using fixed- or random-effect models according to the presence of heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Results Thirteen studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. The colonoscopic techniques included WE as the study group, and WI and air- or CO2-insufflation colonoscopy as control groups. WE was significantly superior to the control procedures in terms of adenoma detection rate, proportion of painless unsedated colonoscopy procedures, and cecal intubation rate according to odds ratios. WE was also significantly better in terms of maximal pain score and patient satisfaction score according to mean difference. Conclusions WE can remarkably improve the adenoma detection rate, proportion of painless unsedated colonoscopy procedures, patient satisfaction, and cecal intubation rate, as well as reducing the maximal pain score in patients undergoing colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiufang Xu
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Dongqiong Ni
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yuping Lu
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Xuan Huang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS To compare water exchange (WE) method with conventional air insufflation (AI) method for colonoscopy, evaluating the technical quality, screening efficacy, and patients' acceptance. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing WE colonoscopy with AI colonoscopy. The pooled data of procedure-associated and patient-related outcomes were assessed, using the weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous variables and relative risk (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous variables, respectively. RESULTS A total of 13 studies involving 7056 patients were included. The cecum intubation rate was similar between WE and AI methods (RR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.99-1.02,P = 0.37); however, a significantly longer cecum intubation time was shown in WE group (WMD = 1.56, 95% CI = 0.75-2.37,P = 0.002). Compared with AI, WE was associated with a higher risk of adenoma detection rate (ADR) (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.18-1.38,P < 0.00001) and polyp detection rate (PDR) (RR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.21-1.39,P < 0.00001). Patients in WE group experienced significantly less maximum pain score (WMD = -1.99, 95% CI = -2.68 to -1.30,P < 0.00001) and less requested on-demand sedation (RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.44-0.77,P = 0.0002). Likewise, they also experienced less abdominal compression (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.51-0.74,P < 0.00001) and reposition (RR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.63-0.86,P = 0.0001). Moreover, patients' willingness to repeat colonoscopy was significantly greater for WE (RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.07-1.21,P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION This meta-analysis confirmed that WE method could significantly increase ADR/PDR and improve patients' acceptance of colonoscopy, while reducing the degree of pain and minimize the need for on-demand sedation and adjunct maneuvers, despite requiring more cecal intubation time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang Liu
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Qing-Ke Huang
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Xiu-Li Dong
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Piao-Piao Jin
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Leung FW, Jia H. Expert endorsement, a prerequisite to general acceptance, marked a significant milestone in the history of water exchange colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88:598-600. [PMID: 30217238 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2018] [Accepted: 08/02/2018] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Felix W Leung
- Departments of Gastroenterology and Medicine, Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, California, USA; David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, North Hills and Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Hui Jia
- Departments of Gastroenterology and Medicine, Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, California, USA; David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, North Hills and Los Angeles, California, USA; Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Chen Z, Li Z, Yu X, Wang G. Is water exchange superior to water immersion for colonoscopy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2018; 24:259-267. [PMID: 29873319 PMCID: PMC6151995 DOI: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_52_18] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background/Aims Recently, water exchange (WE) instead of water immersion (WI) for colonoscopy has been proposed to decrease pain and improve adenoma detection rate (ADR). This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to assess whether WE is superior to WI based on the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Materials and Methods We searched studies from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Only RCTs were eligible for our study. The pooled risk ratios (RRs), pooled mean difference (MD), and pooled 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using the fixed-effects model or random-effects model based on heterogeneity. Results Five RCTs consisting of 2229 colonoscopies were included in this study. WE was associated with a significantly higher ADR than WI (RR = 1.18; CI = 1.05-1.32; P = 0.004), especially in right colon (RR = 1.31; CI = 1.07-1.61; P = 0.01). Compared with WI, WE was confirmed with lower pain score, higher Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score, but more infused water during insertion. There was no statistical difference between WE and WI in cecal intubation rate and the number of patients who had willingness to repeat the examination. Furthermore, both total procedure time and cecal intubation time in WE were significantly longer than that in WI (MD = 2.66; CI = 1.42-3.90; P < 0.0001; vs MD = 4.58; CI = 4.01-5.15; P < 0.0001). Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that WE is superior to WI in improving ADR, attenuating insertion pain and providing better bowel cleansing, but inferior in time and consumption of infused water consumption during insertion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhihao Chen
- Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhengqi Li
- Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Xinying Yu
- Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Guiqi Wang
- Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Khan MY, Dirweesh A, Siddiqui WJ. Impact of Hyoscine Bromide Use on Polyp Detection Rate During Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology Res 2018; 11:295-304. [PMID: 30116429 PMCID: PMC6089588 DOI: 10.14740/gr1057w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2018] [Accepted: 07/02/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of death worldwide. Polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) are key focus in endoscopic research for CRC screening and prevention. Use of anti-spasmodic agents during colonoscopy to help identify adenomas and polyps has remained a controversial topic. Hyoscine butyl bromide (HBB) is the most commonly used anti-spasmodic agent in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have questioned the clinical efficacy and safety of routine use of HBB for polyp and adenoma detection rates. Methods We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and MEDLINE from inception until February 10, 2018, for studies which compared HBB with placebo. We used RevMan version 5.3 for analysis. Procedural end-points were polyps, adenomas, and advanced adenoma detection rates, mean number of polyps detected and cecal intubation time. Results We included seven RCTs with 2,588 patients in our analysis. A total of 1,301 patients were randomized to HBB arm and 1,287 to the placebo arm. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of polyp detection rate, 654 in HBB group vs. 616 in the placebo group, (odds ratio (OR) = 1.11, confidence interval (CI) = 0.93 - 1.34, P = 0.25). There was no difference in secondary outcomes of adenoma detection rate, 430 in HBB group vs. 396 in the placebo group, (OR = 1.06, CI = 0.89 - 1.26, P = 0.51), advanced adenoma detection rate, 92 in HBB vs. 95 in placebo group (OR = 0.95, CI = 0.70 - 1.30, P = 0.76), mean number of polyps detected (point estimate = 0.12, CI = 0.00 - 0.23, P = 0.05), adenomatous polyps (OR = 0.84, CI = 0.39 - 1.81, P = 0.65) and cecal intubation time (point estimate = 0.73, CI = -1.98 - 0.52, P = 0.25) between the two groups. Conclusions The use of HBB in patients undergoing colonoscopy does not appear to improve polyp or adenoma detection rates. It showed a non-significant trend of increased mean number of polyps detected with HBB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Muhammad Yasir Khan
- Department of Medicine, Capital Health Regional Medical Center, Trenton, NJ, USA
| | - Ahmed Dirweesh
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Waqas Javed Siddiqui
- Department of Medicine, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.,Department of Medicine, Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Azevedo R, Leitão C, Pinto J, Ribeiro H, Pereira F, Caldeira A, Banhudo A. Can Water Exchange Improve Patient Tolerance in Unsedated Colonoscopy A Prospective Comparative Study. GE-PORTUGUESE JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY 2017; 25:166-174. [PMID: 29998161 DOI: 10.1159/000484093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2017] [Revised: 10/09/2017] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Background & Aims Unsedated colonoscopy can be painful, poorly tolerated by patients, and associated with unsatisfactory technical performance. Previous studies report an advantage of water exchange over conventional air insufflation in reducing pain during unsedated colonoscopy. Our goal was to analyze the impact of water exchange colonoscopy on the level of maximum pain reported by patients submitted to unsedated colonoscopy, compared to conventional air insufflation. Methods We performed a single-center, patient-blinded, prospective randomized comparative study, where patients were either allocated to the water group, in which the method of colonoscopy used was water exchange, or the standard air group, in which the examination was accomplished with air insufflation. Results A total of 141 patients were randomized, 70 to the water and 71 to the air group. The maximum level of pain reported by patients during unsedated colonoscopy, measured by a numeric scale of pain (0-10), was significantly lower in the water group (3.39 ± 2.32), compared to the air group (4.94 ± 2.10), p < 0.001. The rate of painless colonoscopy was significantly higher in the water group (12.9 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.009). There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding indications for the procedure, quality of bowel preparation, cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, number of position changes, adenoma detection rate, and postprocedural complications. Only the number of abdominal compressions was significantly different, showing that water exchange decreases the number of compressions needed during colonoscopy. Conclusions Water exchange was a safe and equally effective alternative to conventional unsedated colonoscopy, associated with less intraprocedural pain without impairing key performance measures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Azevedo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - Cátia Leitão
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - João Pinto
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - Helena Ribeiro
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - Flávio Pereira
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - Ana Caldeira
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| | - António Banhudo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amato Lusitano Hospital, Castelo Branco, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Hsieh YH, Tseng CW, Hu CT, Koo M, Leung FW. Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy using water exchange, water immersion, and air insufflation. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:192-201. [PMID: 27988288 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2016] [Accepted: 12/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma of any size, is a quality indicator. We tested the hypothesis that water exchange (WE) improves ADR but water immersion (WI) has no adverse effect on ADR compared with air insufflation (AI). METHODS A prospective study was conducted at the Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital in southern Taiwan and the Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital in eastern Taiwan on patients randomly assigned to WE, WI, or AI with stratification by the 3 study colonoscopists. The primary outcome was ADR. RESULTS From July 2013 to December 2015, 651 patients were recruited and randomized into 3 groups with a 1:1:1 ratio (217 patients per group). Overall, ADR met quality standards: WE 49.8% (95% CI, 43.2%-56.4%), AI 37.8% (95% CI, 31.6%-44.4%), and WI 40.6% (95% CI, 34.2%-47.2%). Compared with AI, WE significantly increased ADR (P = .016). There was no difference between WI and WE. ADRs of WI and AI were comparable. Compared with AI, WE confirmed a longer insertion time, higher cleanliness score, but similar adenoma per positive colonoscopy (APPC) and withdrawal time with polypectomy. Subgroup analysis found WE significantly increased ADR in propofol-sedated patients. Multivariate generalized linear mixed model analysis revealed that age ≥50 years, WE (vs AI), colonoscopy indication, no previous history of colonoscopy, and withdrawal time >8 minutes were significant predictors of increased ADR. CONCLUSIONS Confirmation of prior reports showing WE, but not WI, increased ADR further strengthened the validity of our observations. WE significantly increased ADR in propofol-sedated patients. The outcome differences justify assessment of the role of WE in colorectal cancer prevention. Similar APPC and withdrawal times suggest that adequate inspection was performed on colonoscope withdrawal in each of the study arms. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01894191.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Hsi Hsieh
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Chiayi, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Buddhist Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
| | - Chih-Wei Tseng
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Chiayi, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Buddhist Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
| | - Chi-Tan Hu
- School of Medicine, Buddhist Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan; Department of Gastroenterology, Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Hualien, Taiwan
| | - Malcolm Koo
- Department of Medical Research, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Chiayi, Taiwan; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Felix W Leung
- Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hill, California, USA; David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Zhang K, Yuan Q, Zhu S, Xu D, An Z. Is Unsedated Colonoscopy Gaining Ground Over Sedated Colonoscopy? J Natl Med Assoc 2017; 110:143-148. [PMID: 29580447 DOI: 10.1016/j.jnma.2016.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2016] [Revised: 12/10/2016] [Accepted: 12/19/2016] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent cancer with high global incidence and a leading cause of cancer death worldwide. CRC screening is important for early cancer detection and prevention. Most premalignant adenomas can be identified and removed before they become malignant. Colonoscopy plays a vital role in reducing the risk for developing CRC. Although screening programs with colonoscopy have been implemented in many countries and considered beneficial for a number of people, this technique is generally associated with anxiety, embarrassment, pain, and discomfort, resulting in lack of adherence to the recommended screening guidelines. In the US, colonoscopy is mostly performed under sedation, thereby causing amnesia and analgesia. In contrast to sedated colonoscopy, which has been associated with some disadvantages, unsedated colonoscopy exhibits advantages and has been preferred over sedated colonoscopy in numerous cancer centers worldwide. This review enumerates the features of sedated and unsedated colonoscopy with the use of the current relevant evidence-based literature. Unsedated colonoscopy can be a reasonable option for routine and unscheduled CRC screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaixian Zhang
- Department of Oncology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou 277599, China
| | - Qianqian Yuan
- Department of Oncology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou 277599, China
| | - Shuguang Zhu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou 277599, China
| | - Daheng Xu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou 277599, China
| | - Zhe An
- Department of Cardiology, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130033, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Water Exchange Method Significantly Improves Adenoma Detection Rate: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112:568-576. [PMID: 27922025 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2016.501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2016] [Accepted: 09/19/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key colonoscopy quality indicator in Western clinical literature. Our low ADR prompted us to assess novel methods to improve performance. Western retrospective reports suggested that water exchange (WE) could increase ADR. However, most of these studies used pain score or intubation rate as the primary outcome. Here we test the hypothesis that WE significantly increases ADR among Chinese colonoscopists and design a prospective randomized controlled trial using ADR as our primary outcome. METHODS This prospective, randomized controlled trial was performed at six centers in China. Screening, surveillance, and diagnostic cases were randomized to be examined by WE or traditional air insufflation (AI) method. The primary outcome was ADR. RESULTS From April 2014 to July 2015, 3,303 patients were randomized to WE (n=1,653) and AI (n=1,650). The baseline characteristics were comparable. Overall ADR was 18.3% (WE) and 13.4% (AI) (relative risk 1.45, 95% confidential interval: 1.20-1.75, P<0.001). ADR in screening patients using AI was 25.8% (male) and 15.7% (female). ADR in screening patients aged >50 years old was 29.4% (WE) and 22.9% (AI) (relative risk 1.09, 95% confidential interval: 1.00-1.19, P=0.040). The increase by WE was reproducibly observed in all indication categories, and significant in screening and diagnostic cases. The limitation imposed by the unblinded investigators was mitigated by comparable inspection times in cases without polyps, similar adenoma per positive colonoscopy, and reproducible enhancement of ADR and adenoma per colonoscopy by WE across all eight investigators. CONCLUSIONS This prospective study confirms Western retrospective data that WE significantly improves ADR among Chinese colonoscopists. WE may be superior to AI for screening colonoscopy in China. Colonoscopists elsewhere with low ADR might consider evaluating WE for performance improvement.
Collapse
|
|
17
|
de Groen PC. Editorial: Polyps, Pain, and Propofol: Is Water Exchange the Panacea for All? Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112:578-580. [PMID: 28381846 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2017.29] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2017] [Accepted: 01/01/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Water exchange (WE) is a relatively new method of endoscope insertion during colonoscopy. Although its origin is rooted in the insertion phase of colonoscopy, allowing the procedure to proceed with more ease, less discomfort, and less or no sedation, its most important value may reside in the withdrawal phase. In this issue, a randomized, prospective study from China specifically designed to examine the effect of WE on adenoma detection rate (ADR) confirms previous findings: WE improves ADR. Here we discuss the trial results, the benefits of WE, and the challenges that may preclude or delay widespread WE implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Piet C de Groen
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Rondonotti E, Andrealli A, Amato A, Paggi S, Conti CB, Spinzi G, Radaelli F. Technical interventions to increase adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 10:1349-1358. [PMID: 27701933 DOI: 10.1080/17474124.2016.1245143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the most robust colonoscopy quality metric and clinical studies have adopted it as the ideal method to assess the impact of technical interventions. Areas covered: We reviewed papers focusing on the impact of colonoscopy technical issues on ADR, including withdrawal time and technique, second evaluation of the right colon, patient positional changes, gastrointestinal assistant participation during colonoscopy, water-aided technique, optimization of bowel preparation and antispasmodic administration. Expert commentary: Overall, technical interventions are inexpensive, available worldwide and easy to implement. Some of them, such as the adoption of split dose regimen and slow scope withdrawal to allow a careful inspection, have been demonstrated to significantly improve ADR. Emerging data support the use of water-exchange colonoscopy. According to published studies, other technical interventions seem to provide only marginal benefit to ADR. Unfortunately, the available evidence has methodological limitations, such as small sample sizes, the inclusion of expert endoscopists only and the evaluation of single technical interventions. Additionally, larger studies are needed to clarify whether these interventions might have a higher benefit on low adenoma detectors and whether the implementation of a bundle of them, instead of a single technical maneuver, might have a greater impact on ADR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Arnaldo Amato
- a Gastroenterology Unit , Ospedale Valduce , Como , Italy
| | - Silvia Paggi
- a Gastroenterology Unit , Ospedale Valduce , Como , Italy
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Cadoni S, Falt P, Sanna S, Argiolas M, Fanari V, Gallittu P, Liggi M, Mura D, Porcedda ML, Smajstrla V, Erriu M, Leung FW. Impact of Colonoscopy Insertion Techniques on Adenoma Detection. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61:2068-75. [PMID: 26846118 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-016-4053-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2015] [Accepted: 01/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low adenoma detection rate (ADR) predicts development of interval cancers, found mainly in the right (cecum-ascending) colon, where poor bowel preparation is an associated factor. Single-site studies reported increased detection of adenomas in the proximal colon segments by water exchange (WE). Data about colon cleansing revealed that WE had the greatest impact in the right colon. AIMS To test the hypothesis that WE had the greatest impact on ADR in colon segments with the most favorable bowel cleanliness scores, namely the right colon. METHODS We pooled right colon and overall ADR data of three similarly designed colonoscopy trials that compared WE, water immersion (WI) and insufflation of air or carbon dioxide (AICD) in a mixed gender European population. RESULTS In this study, 1200 (704 males) subjects and were included. 288 were screening cases. Demographic and procedural data were comparable. Water exchange achieved significantly higher right colon <10 mm ADR (11.9 %, vs WI 6.9 %, p = 0.016; vs AICD 7.2 %, p = 0.025). Water exchange achieved the lowest proportions of poor bowel preparation and the highest right colon and overall Boston bowel preparation scale scores (p range 0.003, <0.0005). In patients with right colon excellent bowel cleanliness, water exchange was the only method significantly associated with right colon adenoma detection. One of the limitations is unblinded colonoscopists. CONCLUSIONS In a mixed gender European population, water exchange is confirmed to be a superior insertion technique showing a significant increase in <10 mm right colon adenoma detection, achieving the cleanest colon and lowest proportions of poor bowel preparation requiring repeat procedures. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV NO NCT01781650, 01954862, 01780818.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sergio Cadoni
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Via S. Leonardo, 1, 09016, Iglesias, CI, Italy.
| | - Přemysl Falt
- Digestive Diseases Center, Vìtkovice Hospital, Zálužanského 1192/15, 703 84, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Stefano Sanna
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, 09037, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Mariangela Argiolas
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, 09037, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Viviana Fanari
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, 09037, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Paolo Gallittu
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Via S. Leonardo, 1, 09016, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Mauro Liggi
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Via S. Leonardo, 1, 09016, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Donatella Mura
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Via S. Leonardo, 1, 09016, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Maria L Porcedda
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, 09037, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Vit Smajstrla
- Digestive Diseases Center, Vìtkovice Hospital, Zálužanského 1192/15, 703 84, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Matteo Erriu
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, 09121, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Felix W Leung
- Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hills, CA, 91343, USA.,David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 90024, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Water assisted colonoscopy: A promising new technique. Dig Liver Dis 2016; 48:569-70. [PMID: 27034150 DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2016] [Accepted: 03/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
|
21
|
Cadoni S, Falt P, Sanna S, Argiolas M, Fanari V, Gallittu P, Liggi M, Mura D, Porcedda ML, Smajstrla V, Erriu M, Leung FW. Insertion water exchange increases right colon adenoma and hyperplastic polyp detection rates during withdrawal. Dig Liver Dis 2016; 48:638-43. [PMID: 27017108 DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2015] [Revised: 02/09/2016] [Accepted: 03/04/2016] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Single site studies in male Veterans in the U.S. reported increased detection of presumptive cancer precursors (adenomas, hyperplastic polyps) in the proximal colon (cecum-splenic flexure) by water exchange. AIMS Assess the reproducibility of the observation. METHODS Analysis of secondary outcomes collected prospectively in 3 similarly designed randomized controlled trials using water exchange, water immersion and insufflation (air or carbon dioxide). MAIN OUTCOME detection rates of adenomas and hyperplastic polyps in proximal, transverse and right colon (cecum-ascending). RESULTS 704 males (173 screening) were evaluated. In the proximal colon, WE showed increased detection of small adenomas (p=0.009) and adenomas plus hyperplastic polyps (p=0.015) (vs insufflation); increased detection of adenomas plus hyperplastic polyps of any size (p=0.045) and of small size (p=0.04) (vs water immersion). In the right colon water exchange increased detection of small adenomas (19% vs 12.1%, p=0.04) (vs insufflation); small adenomas (19% vs 12%, p=0.038), adenomas plus hyperplastic polyps of any size (25% vs 16.7%, p=0.028) and of small size (23.7% vs 14.6%, p=0.012) (vs water immersion). Water exchange significantly improved bowel cleanliness. Sedation had no impact on lesion detection. CONCLUSIONS Water exchange is a superior insertion technique for detection of adenomas and hyperplastic polyps primarily in the right colon, especially those of small size.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sergio Cadoni
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Iglesias, CI, Italy.
| | - Přemysl Falt
- Digestive Diseases Center, Vìtkovice Hospital, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Stefano Sanna
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Mariangela Argiolas
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Viviana Fanari
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Paolo Gallittu
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Mauro Liggi
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Donatella Mura
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Iglesias, CI, Italy
| | - Maria L Porcedda
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, N. S. di Bonaria Hospital, San Gavino Monreale, VS, Italy
| | - Vit Smajstrla
- Digestive Diseases Center, Vìtkovice Hospital, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Matteo Erriu
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, CA, Italy
| | - Felix W Leung
- Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hills, CA, USA; David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Arai M, Okimoto K, Ishigami H, Taida T, Oyamada A, Minemura S, Saito K, Tsuboi M, Maruoka D, Matsumura T, Nakagawa T, Katsuno T, Mitsuhashi K, Nakagawa Y, Yamaguchi K, Yokosuka O. A randomized controlled trial comparing water exchange and air insufflation during colonoscopy without sedation. Int J Colorectal Dis 2016; 31:1217-1223. [PMID: 27059039 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-016-2580-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/30/2016] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Previous studies have shown that water exchange is superior to air insufflation in attenuating insertion pain during colonoscopy. We conducted a randomized controlled trial with head-to-head comparison of these methods to assess their effectiveness in colonoscopy without sedation. METHODS A total of 447 outpatients were randomized to either water exchange (WE) or the standard air (CO2) insufflation (AI). The primary outcome was the improvement of patient intraprocedural pain (pain score), evaluated using a questionnaire (scores 1 to 5). RESULTS After exclusion of 44 patients from further analysis, 403 patients were analyzed. There was no difference in clinical background between the WE and AI groups. Patients in the WE group reported less intraprocedural pain than those in the AI group (2.17 ± 1.06 vs. 2.42 ± 1.03; unpaired t test, p = 0.021). We divided the cases into two groups, more or less painful colonoscopy, based on age, body mass index, use of anti-peristaltic drugs or not, and physician's experience. In less painful colonoscopy, the WE method could reduce pain effectively but its effect was limited in the more painful group. CONCLUSION WE is superior to AI for attenuating insertion pain during colonoscopy without sedation, but its efficacy is limited in more painful endoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Makoto Arai
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan.
| | - Kenichiro Okimoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Hideaki Ishigami
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Takashi Taida
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Arata Oyamada
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Shoko Minemura
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Keiko Saito
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Masaru Tsuboi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Daisuke Maruoka
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Tomoaki Matsumura
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Tomoo Nakagawa
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Tatsuro Katsuno
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| | - Kanae Mitsuhashi
- Chiba Foundation for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Chiba, Japan
| | - Yuki Nakagawa
- Chiba Foundation for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Chiba, Japan
| | - Kazuya Yamaguchi
- Chiba Foundation for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Chiba, Japan
| | - Osamu Yokosuka
- Department of Gastroenterology and Nephrology (K1), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana 1-8-1, Chiba, 260-8670, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Aranda-Hernández J, Hwang J, Kandel G. Seeing better - Evidence based recommendations on optimizing colonoscopy adenoma detection rate. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22:1767-1778. [PMID: 26855536 PMCID: PMC4724608 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i5.1767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2015] [Revised: 08/17/2015] [Accepted: 12/01/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is one of the three most frequent causes of cancer deaths in men and women in Europe and North America. Diagnosis and resection of adenomas has convincingly demonstrated its utility in diminishing colorectal cancer incidence. Therefore, colonoscopy is now the gold standard for colorectal cancer screening. But it is also known that colonoscopy effectiveness varies among endoscopists. Among different quality indicators, the most used is the adenoma detection rate (ADR) which is the percentage of average-risk patients for colorectal cancer who are found to have at least one adenoma or adenocarcinoma during a screening colonoscopy. There is compelling evidence supporting an inverse correlation between ADR and interval colorectal cancer (cancer found after a screening colonoscopy). Many factors such as quality of precolonoscopy preparation, additional observers, manoeuvres with the endoscope (second view, retroflexion, water inflation rather than air), time spent during withdrawal, changes in patient position, fold-flattener devices, new imaging or endoscopic modalities and use of intravenous or through the scope sprayed drugs, have been studied and developed with the aim of increasing the ADR. This reviews discusses these factors, and the current evidence, to “see better” in the colon and optimize ADR.
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Schmidt-Tänzer W, Eickhoff A. What Influences the Quality of Prevention Colonoscopy? VISZERALMEDIZIN 2015; 30:26-31. [PMID: 26288579 PMCID: PMC4513811 DOI: 10.1159/000358747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Background Colorectal cancer still has a high incidence and mortality. Although colonoscopy is considered as gold standard of colorectal cancer screening, there still exists an unsatisfactory level of adenomas missed in screening and surveillance colonoscopy. Furthermore, patients bear the burden of potentially unpleasant and painful examination and preparation procedures. Method A search of the literature using PubMed was carried out, supplemented by a review of the programs of the Digestive Disease Week (DDW) and the United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW) 2011-2013. Results Several new approaches to colonoscopy were described: water, CO2 and cap colonoscopy, and application of spasmolytics such as hyoscine butylbromide and glucagon. The use of these methods does not necessitate the purchase of new endoscopes. They are feasible and safe, facilitate achieving the aim of more comfort and less pain, and perhaps allow lower doses of sedatives to be used. However, a clear effect on procedure time is lacking. Furthermore, the published data do not consistently answer the question of whether these techniques have a positive impact on the most important goal, the better detection of carcinoma precursors. Conclusion More efforts to optimize bowel preparation have to be made to improve visualization of the mucosal surface. The most reliable criteria for the quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy remain a minimum cecal intubation rate of >90%, a withdrawal time of at least 6 or better 9 min, and an adenoma detection rate of >20%. These results should be achieved with a complication rate lower than 1%, including polypectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wolfgang Schmidt-Tänzer
- Medizinische Klinik II, Klinik für Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie und Infektiologie, Klinikum Hanau GmbH, Hanau, Germany
| | - Axel Eickhoff
- Medizinische Klinik II, Klinik für Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie und Infektiologie, Klinikum Hanau GmbH, Hanau, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Abstract
The successful intubation of the cecum during screening or surveillance colonoscopy is vital to ensure complete mucosal inspection of the colon on withdrawal. Even when performed by an experienced endoscopist, colonoscope insertion can sometimes be challenging. Water-aided colonoscopy can be used to assist the endoscopist in navigating colons with anatomies that may be challenging owing to severe angulation or redundancy. Water-assisted colonoscopy involves the infusion of water without air and subsequent suctioning during insertion (exchange) or withdrawal (immersion or infusion). This review discusses the technique, effectiveness, safety of water-assisted colonoscopy as well as the application in sedationless endscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph C Anderson
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Department of Medicine, 215 North Main Street, White River Junction, VT 05009, USA; The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth Medical, Department of Medicine, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Falt P, Šmajstrla V, Fojtík P, Tvrdík J, Urban O. Cool water vs warm water immersion for minimal sedation colonoscopy: a double-blind randomized trial. Colorectal Dis 2014; 15:e612-7. [PMID: 23819909 DOI: 10.1111/codi.12336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2013] [Accepted: 03/21/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM Water-aided insertion as an alternative colonoscopy technique reduces patient discomfort. Warm water has been used in most published trials, but the use of cool water is easier and, if equally effective, could support the use of the water-aided technique in routine practice. METHOD A double-blind, randomized, single-centre study was performed in which 201 patients were randomized to either cool (20-24 °C) or warm (37 °C) water immersion insertion. The primary outcome was caecal intubation time. The success rate of minimal sedation and patient discomfort were also assessed. RESULTS The caecal intubation time for cool and warm water was similar (6.9 ± 3.5 vs 7.0 ± 3.4 min, P = 0.64). The respective success rates of minimal sedation colonoscopy (89.1% vs 90%, P = 1.00) and discomfort (P = 0.51) were no different. All other outcomes except a greater need for abdominal compression in the cool water arm (P = 0.04) were similar including the total procedure time, terminal ileum intubation rate, adenoma detection, length of the inserted scope, water volume, non-standard position rate, difficulty of the procedure and the patient's temperature sensation. CONCLUSION The use of cool water did not modify the caecal intubation time compared with warm water. Exception for abdominal compression, all other end-points were no different. Cool water immersion is an alternative to the technically more demanding warm water immersion colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Falt
- Digestive Diseases Centre, Vítkovice Hospital, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Hsieh YH, Koo M, Leung FW. A patient-blinded randomized, controlled trial comparing air insufflation, water immersion, and water exchange during minimally sedated colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109:1390-1400. [PMID: 24890443 DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2014.126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 83] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2014] [Accepted: 03/18/2014] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Minimal sedation obviates patient recovery burdens, but intolerable pain limits success of cecal intubation. Painless or minimally uncomfortable insertion ensures success of cecal intubation, current patient satisfaction, and willingness to repeat future colonoscopy with minimal sedation. Water immersion (WI) and water exchange (WE), when separately compared with air insufflation (AI), significantly reduced insertion pain. To assess comparative effectiveness, we conducted a randomized controlled trial with head-to-head comparison of these three methods. We hypothesized that WE could produce the highest proportion of patients reporting painless insertion. METHODS This prospective patient-blinded trial (NCT01535326) enrolled minimally sedated (25 mg intramuscular meperidine) patients randomized to AI, WI, or WE (90 patients/group) to aid insertion. The previously validated primary outcome was the proportion of patients reporting painless insertion. RESULTS Painless insertion was reported by 30.0% (AI), 43.3% (WI), and 61.1% (WE) of patients (P<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that, after adjusting for gender, body mass index, abdominal compression, position change, insertion time to cecum, and length of scope at cecum, only WE was significantly associated with painless insertion compared with AI (odds ratio (OR)=0.08, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.03-0.24, P<0.001) or WI (OR=0.14, 95% CI=0.05-0.40, P<0.001). Adenoma detection rate (ADR) in the right (cecum and ascending) colon was 11.1% (AI), 14.4% (WI), and 26.7% (WE) (P=0.015). The limitations included single site study with unblinded colonoscopist and assistant. CONCLUSIONS This head-to-head comparison of AI vs. WI vs. WE confirmed that WE was superior to WI and AI, with a significantly greater proportion of patients reporting painless insertion. The significantly higher ADR in the right colon in the WE group warrants further investigations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Hsi Hsieh
- 1] Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Buddhist Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan [2] Buddhist Tzu Chi University, School of Medicine, Hualien, Taiwan
| | - Malcolm Koo
- 1] Department of Medical Research, Buddhist Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan [2] Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Felix W Leung
- 1] Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hill, California, USA [2] David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Abstract
Water-aided methods for colonoscopy include the established water immersion and the recent novel modification of water exchange. Water immersion entails the use of water as an adjunct to air insufflations to facilitate insertion. Water exchange evolved from water immersion to facilitate completion of colonoscopy without discomfort in unsedated patients. Infused water is removed predominantly during insertion rather than withdrawal. A higher adenoma detection rate has been reported with water exchange. Aggregate data of randomized controlled trials suggest that water exchange may be superior to water immersion in attenuating colonoscopy discomfort and optimizing adenoma detection, particularly in the proximal colon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felix W Leung
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, 111G, 16111 Plummer Street, North Hill, CA 91343, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Yen AW, Leung JW, Leung FW. A novel method with significant impact on adenoma detection: combined water-exchange and cap-assisted colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77:944-8. [PMID: 23473001 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2012] [Accepted: 01/01/2013] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Water exchange provides salvage cleansing and improves adenoma detection, but drawbacks include prolonged procedure time. Cap-assisted colonoscopy decreases cecal intubation time but is limited by impaired views when feces lodge in the cap. OBJECTIVE To investigate the impact of combined water-exchange and cap-assisted colonoscopy (WCC) on detection of adenomas and proximal colon serrated polyps. DESIGN Retrospective, single-center, single-colonoscopist, consecutive group observational study. SETTING Veterans Affairs outpatient endoscopy suite. PATIENTS Outpatients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy. INTERVENTION WCC data collected from 100 consecutive patients were compared to a control group of 101 consecutive patients examined with conventional air insufflation colonoscopy during the prior 4-month period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Adenoma detection rate (ADR), adenomas detected per colonoscopy, proximal colon serrated polyp detection rate, and proximal colon serrated polyps per colonoscopy rate. RESULTS Compared with controls, the WCC group had a higher polyp detection rate (93.0% vs 84.2%; P = .07), ADR (75.0% vs 59.4%; P = .02), proximal colon ADR (61.0% vs 47.5%; P = .07), proximal colon serrated polyp detection rate (24.0% vs 9.9%; P = .009), number of adenomas per colonoscopy (2.70 vs 1.50; P = .002), and mean number of proximal colon serrated polyps per colonoscopy (0.38 vs 0.12; P = .004). LIMITATIONS Retrospective study; single, unblinded endoscopist. CONCLUSION ADR and adenomas per colonoscopy are both sensitive indicators of colonoscopy quality. WCC merges two simple methods to improve the performance of screening and surveillance colonoscopy. The data suggest that larger, prospective studies are necessary to determine if there are differences between water-exchange combined with cap-assisted maneuvers and the individual components used alone in lesion detection in screening and surveillance colonoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew W Yen
- Sacramento Veterans Affairs Medical Center, VANCHCS, Division of Gastroenterology, Mather, California 95655, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Luo H, Zhang L, Liu X, Leung FW, Liu Z, Wang X, Xue L, Wu K, Fan D, Pan Y, Guo X. Water exchange enhanced cecal intubation in potentially difficult colonoscopy. Unsedated patients with prior abdominal or pelvic surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77:767-73. [PMID: 23394837 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.12.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2012] [Accepted: 12/09/2012] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colonoscopy is widely used for management of colorectal diseases. A history of abdominal or pelvic surgery is a well-recognized factor associated with difficult colonoscopy. Although water exchange colonoscopy (WEC) was effective in small groups of male U.S. veterans with such a history, its application in other cultural settings is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To investigate the application of WEC in such patients. DESIGN Prospective, randomized, controlled, patient-blinded study. SETTING Tertiary-care referral center in China. PATIENTS Outpatients with prior abdominal or pelvic surgery undergoing unsedated diagnostic, screening, or surveillance colonoscopy. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized to examination by either WEC or conventional air colonoscopy (AC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Cecal intubation rate. RESULTS A total of 110 patients were randomized to the WEC (n = 55) or AC (n = 55) group. WEC significantly increased the cecal intubation rate (92.7% vs 76.4%; P = .033). The maximum pain scores (± standard deviation) were 2.1 ± 1.8 (WEC) and 4.6 ± 1.7 (AC), respectively (P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed that the colonoscopy method was the only independent predictor of failed colonoscopy (odds ratio 11.44, 95% confidence interval, 1.35-97.09). A higher proportion of patients examined by WEC would be willing to have a repeat unsedated colonoscopy (90.9% vs 72.7%, P = .013). LIMITATIONS Single center; unblinded but experienced endoscopists. CONCLUSION This randomized, controlled trial confirms that the water exchange method significantly enhanced cecal intubation in potentially difficult colonoscopy in unsedated patients with prior abdominal or pelvic surgery. The lower pain scores and higher proportion accepting repeat of the unsedated option suggest that WEC is promising. It may enhances compliance with colonoscopy in specific populations. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01485133.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hui Luo
- Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Carbon dioxide insufflation or warm-water infusion versus standard air insufflation for unsedated colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2013; 56:511-8. [PMID: 23478620 DOI: 10.1097/dcr.0b013e318279addd] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The increasing demand for colonoscopy has renewed the interest for unsedated procedures. Alternative techniques, such as carbon dioxide insufflation and warm-water infusion, have been advocated to improve patient tolerance for colonoscopy in comparison with air insufflation. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits of carbon dioxide insufflation and warm-water irrigation over air insufflation in unsedated patients. DESIGN This study was a randomized, controlled trial. SETTING This study was conducted at a nonacademic single center. PATIENTS Consecutive outpatients agreeing to start colonoscopy without premedication were included. INTERVENTIONS Patients were assigned to either carbon dioxide insufflation, warm-water irrigation, or air insufflation colonoscopy insertion phase. Sedation/analgesia were administered on patient request if significant pain or discomfort occurred. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome measured was the percentage of patients requiring sedation/analgesia. Pain and tolerance scores were assessed at discharge by using a 100-mm visual analog scale. RESULTS Three hundred forty-one subjects (115 in the carbon dioxide, 113 in the warm-water, and 113 in the air group) were enrolled. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that the proportion of patients requesting sedation/analgesia during colonoscopy was 15.5% in the carbon dioxide group, 13.2% in the warm-water group, and 25.6% in the air group (p = 0.04 carbon dioxide vs air; p = 0.03 warm water vs air). Median (interquartile range) scores for pain were 30 (10-50), 28 (15-50), and 46 (22-62) in the carbon dioxide, warm-water, and air groups (carbon dioxide vs air, p < 0.01; warm water vs air, p < 0.01); corresponding figures for tolerance were 20 (5-30), 19 (5-36), and 28 (10-50) (carbon dioxide vs air, p < 0.01; warm water vs air, p < 0.01). LIMITATIONS This investigation was limited because it was a single-center study and the endoscopists were not blinded to randomization. CONCLUSIONS Carbon dioxide insufflation was associated with a decrease in the proportion of patients requesting on-demand sedation, improved patient tolerance, and decreased colonoscopy-related pain in comparison with air insufflation. The findings regarding warm-water irrigation confirmed the previously reported advantages, so that warm-water irrigation and carbon dioxide insufflation could represent competitive strategies for colonoscopy in unsedated patients.
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Lee BY, Katon R, Herzig D, Fennerty MB. Warm water infusion during sedated colonoscopy does not decrease amount of sedation medication used. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76:1182-7. [PMID: 23021168 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2012] [Accepted: 08/01/2012] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Water infusion versus air insufflation during colonoscope insertion has been suggested to reduce patient discomfort and decrease sedation medication requirements. Warm water is thought to further facilitate colonoscopy perhaps by decreasing colon spasm. OBJECTIVE To compare the utility of warm (35°-38°C) versus cool (20°-23°C) water infused during colonoscopic insertion by measuring patient sedation medication use and discomfort scores between the warm and cool water groups. DESIGN Randomized, controlled, double-blinded study. SETTING Outpatient endoscopy unit at an academic medical center. PATIENTS A total of 175 adults. INTERVENTION Elective outpatient sedated screening colonoscopies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Sedation medication used, pain scores, cecal intubation rate, endoscopy times, satisfaction scores, and patient willingness to repeat procedures. RESULTS There was no significant difference in sedation medication requirement during colonoscopy with the use of warm or cool water (fentanyl 83.6 ± 29.0 μg vs 87.6 ± 39.6 μg; P = .45; midazolam 3.3 ± 1.2 mg vs 3.3 ± 1.3 mg; P = .91). There was no significant difference in patient pain scores or satisfaction scores. Cecal intubation rates (100%) were similar. There was no significant difference in cecal intubation times (6 minutes 40 seconds ± 4 minutes 9 seconds vs 7 minutes 49 seconds ± 4 minutes 0 seconds; P = .06) between the warm and cool water groups. All patients were willing to repeat the colonoscopy by using the same method in both groups. LIMITATIONS Limited generalizability to patients undergoing screening sedated colonoscopies with good to excellent bowel preparation. CONCLUSION Water does not need to be warmed before infusion in patients undergoing sedated colonoscopies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brent Y Lee
- Division of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Leung FW, Amato A, Ell C, Friedland S, Harker JO, Hsieh YH, Leung JW, Mann SK, Paggi S, Pohl J, Radaelli F, Ramirez FC, Siao-Salera R, Terruzzi V. Water-aided colonoscopy: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76:657-66. [PMID: 22898423 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.467] [Citation(s) in RCA: 95] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2011] [Accepted: 04/25/2012] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Water-aided methods for colonoscopy are distinguished by the timing of removal of infused water, predominantly during withdrawal (water immersion) or during insertion (water exchange). OBJECTIVE To discuss the impact of these approaches on colonoscopy pain and adenoma detection rate (ADR). DESIGN Systematic review. SETTING Randomized, controlled trial (RCT) that compared water-aided methods and air insufflation during colonoscope insertion. PATIENTS Patients undergoing colonoscopy. INTERVENTION Medline, PubMed, and Google searches (January 2008-December 2011) and personal communications of manuscripts in press were considered to identify appropriate RCTs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Pain during colonoscopy and ADR. RCTs were grouped according to whether water immersion or water exchange was used. Reported pain scores and ADR were tabulated based on group assignment. RESULTS Pain during colonoscopy is significantly reduced by both water immersion and water exchange compared with traditional air insufflation. The reduction in pain scores was qualitatively greater with water exchange as compared with water immersion. A mixed pattern of increases and decreases in ADR was observed with water immersion. A higher ADR, especially proximal to the splenic flexure, was obtained when water exchange was implemented. LIMITATIONS Differences in the reports limit application of meta-analysis. The inability to blind the colonoscopists exposed the observations to uncertain bias. CONCLUSION Compared with air insufflation, both water immersion and water exchange significantly reduce colonoscopy pain. Water exchange may be superior to water immersion in minimizing colonoscopy discomfort and in increasing ADR. A head-to-head comparison of these 3 approaches is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felix W Leung
- Research and Medical Services, Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hills, Los Angeles, California 91343, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Yen AW, Leung JW, Leung FW. A new method for screening and surveillance colonoscopy: Combined water-exchange and cap-assisted colonoscopy. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2012; 2:114-119. [PMID: 23805389 DOI: 10.4161/jig.23730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2012] [Revised: 06/01/2012] [Accepted: 06/02/2012] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Colonoscopy plays an important and central role in current colorectal cancer screening and prevention programs, but it is an imperfect tool. Adjunct techniques may help improve the performance of colonoscopy to increase the detection of polyps with neoplastic potential. This study investigates the novel approach of combined water-exchange and cap-assisted colonoscopy (WCC) and its impact on adenoma detection. METHODS A single-center single-colonoscopist consecutive group observational study to compare WCC with conventional air insufflation colonoscopy was performed. Data were collected from 50 consecutive patients undergoing outpatient colorectal cancer screening or polyp surveillance with WCC. Adenoma detection rates (ADR) and adenomas detected per colonoscopy (APC) were compared to a control group of 101 consecutive patients examined with conventional air colonoscopy during the immediate prior period. RESULTS Cecal intubation was achieved in all patients. As an emerging and alternative quality metric for colonoscopy, APC was significantly higher in the WCC group (3.08 vs. 1.50, p=0.0021). The conventional quality metric, overall ADR, was higher in the WCC group compared to the air colonoscopy group (70.0% vs. 59.4%, p=0.22). This difference was not statistically significant, likely due to a type II error. CONCLUSION The observational data suggest APC is a more sensitive indicator of quality colonoscopy than ADR. WCC shows promise as a novel technique that merges two simple adjunct methods to help improve the performance of colonoscopy. The data suggest larger, prospective studies are necessary to determine the true impact of water-exchange combined with cap-assisted maneuvers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew W Yen
- Division of Gastroenterology, Sacramento Veterans Affairs Medical Center, VANCHCS ; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of California Davis Medical Center
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Leung FW. Benchmarking and quality-screening colonoscopy. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2012; 2:100-102. [PMID: 23805385 DOI: 10.4161/jig.23726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2012] [Revised: 05/07/2012] [Accepted: 05/08/2012] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Felix W Leung
- Gastroenterology, Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, North Hill ; David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Leung JW, Thai A, Yen A, Ward G, Abramyan O, Lee J, Smith B, Leung F. Magnetic endoscope imaging (ScopeGuide) elucidates the mechanism of action of the pain-alleviating impact of water exchange colonoscopy - attenuation of loop formation. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2012; 2:142-146. [PMID: 23805397 DOI: 10.4161/jig.23738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2012] [Revised: 10/15/2012] [Accepted: 10/15/2012] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The explanation why water exchange colonoscopy produces a significant reduction of pain during colonoscopy is unknown. A recent editorial recommended use of magnetic endoscope imaging (MEI) to elucidate the explanation. OBJECTIVE In unselected patients to show that MEI documents less frequent loop formation when water exchange is used. DESIGN Observational, performance improvement. SETTING Veterans Affairs outpatient endoscopy. PATIENTS Routine colonoscopy cases. INTERVENTIONS Colonoscopy using air or water exchange method was performed as previously described. The MEI equipment (ScopeGuide, Olympus) with built-in magnetic sensors displays the configuration of the colonoscope inside the patient. During sedated colonoscopy the endoscopist was blinded to the ScopeGuide images which were recorded and subsequently reviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Loop formation based on a visual guide provided by Olympus. RESULTS There were 41 and 32 cases in the water exchange and air group, respectively. The sigmoid N loop was most common, followed by the sigmoid alpha loop, and exaggeration of scope curvature at the splenic flexure/transverse colon. Of these, 20/32 vs. 9/41 patients (p=0.0007) had sigmoid looping, and 17/32 vs. 9/41 patients (p=0.0007) had sigmoid/splenic looping when the scope tip was in the transverse colon, in the air and water exchange group, respectively. LIMITATIONS Colonoscopy method was not blinded and non randomized. CONCLUSION MEI data objectively demonstrated significantly fewer loops during water exchange colonoscopy, elucidating its mechanism of pain alleviation - attenuation of loop formation. Since MEI feedback enhances cecal intubation by trainees, the role of MEI combined water exchange in speeding up trainee learning curves deserves further evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph W Leung
- Gastroenterology, Sacramento VA Medical Center, Mather, CA ; Gastroenterology, UC Davis Medical Center, Sacramento
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Fischer LS, Lumsden A, Leung FW. Water exchange method for colonoscopy: learning curve of an experienced colonoscopist in a U.S. community practice setting. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2012; 2:128-132. [PMID: 23805393 DOI: 10.4161/jig.23734] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2012] [Revised: 06/15/2012] [Accepted: 06/05/2012] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Water exchange colonoscopy has been reported to reduce examination discomfort and to provide salvage cleansing in unsedated or minimally sedated patients. The prolonged insertion time and perceived difficulty of insertion associated with water exchange have been cited as a barrier to its widespread use. AIM To assess the feasibility of learning and using the water exchange method of colonoscopy in a U.S. community practice setting. SETTING Quality improvement program in nonacademic community endoscopy centers. SUBJECTS Patients undergoing sedated diagnostic, surveillance, or screening colonoscopy. METHODS After direct coaching by a knowledgeable trainer, an experienced colonoscopist initiated colonoscopy using the water method. Whenever >5 min elapsed without advancing the colonoscope, conversion to air insufflation was made to ensure timely completion of the examination. PRIMARY OUTCOME Water Method Intention-to-treat (ITT) cecal intubation rate (CIR). RESULTS Female patients had a significantly higher rate of past abdominal surgery and a significantly lower ITTCIR. The ITTCIR showed a progressive increase over time in both males and females to 85-90%. Mean insertion time was maintained at 9 to 10 min. The overall CIR was 99%. CONCLUSION Use of water exchange did not preclude cecal intubation upon conversion to usual air insufflation in sedated patients examined by an experienced colonoscopist. With practice ITTCIR increased over time in both male and female patients. Larger volumes of water exchanged were associated with higher ITTCIR and better quality scores of bowel preparation. The data suggest that learning water exchange by a busy colonoscopist in a community practice setting is feasible and outcomes conform to accepted quality standards.
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Leung F, Cheung R, Fan R, Fischer L, Friedland S, Ho S, Hsieh Y, Hung I, Li M, Matsui S, McQuaid K, Ohning G, Ojuri A, Sato T, Shergill A, Shoham M, Simons T, Walter M, Yen A. The water exchange method for colonoscopy-effect of coaching. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2012; 2:122-125. [PMID: 23805391 DOI: 10.4161/jig.23732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2012] [Revised: 06/05/2012] [Accepted: 06/07/2012] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
The growing popularity of water immersion is supported by its long history as an adjunct to air insufflation; after facilitating colonoscope passage, the infused water is conveniently removed during withdrawal. Water exchange, a modification of water immersion to minimize discomfort in scheduled unsedated patients in the U.S. is new. Even though it may be superior in reducing pain and increasing adenoma detection, the paradigm shift to complete exclusion of air during insertion necessitates removal of infused water containing residual feces, a step often perceived as laborious and time-consuming. The nuances are the efficient steps to remove infused water predominantly during insertion to maintain minimal distension and deliver salvage cleansing. Mastery of the novel maneuvers with practice returns insertion time towards baseline. In this observational study the impact of direct verbal coaching on the primary outcome of intention-to-treat cecal intubation was assessed. The results showed that 14 of 19 (74%) experienced colonoscopists achieved 100% intention-to-treat cecal intubation. Initiation of the examination with water exchange did not preclude completion when conversion to the more familiar air insufflation method was deemed necessary to achieve cecal intubation (total 98%). The overall intention-to-treat cecal intubation rate was 88%, 90% in male and 87% in female. Only 2.7% of bowel preparation was rated as poor during withdrawal. The mean volume of water infused and cecal intubation time was 1558 ml and 18 min, respectively. Direct coaching appears to facilitate understanding of the nuances of the water exchange method. Studies of individual learning curves are necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fw Leung
- Gastroenterology, Sepulveda ACC, VAGLAHS, North Hills, CA, United States ; Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
Leung F, Harker J, Leung J, Siao-Salera R, Mann S, Ramirez F, Friedland S, Amato A, Radaelli F, Paggi S, Terruzzi V, Hsieh Y. Removal of infused water predominantly during insertion (water exchange) is consistently associated with a greater reduction of pain score - review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of water method colonoscopy. JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL GASTROENTEROLOGY 2011; 1:114-120. [PMID: 22163081 DOI: 10.4161/jig.1.3.18510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2011] [Revised: 05/29/2011] [Accepted: 06/03/2011] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Variation in the outcomes in RcTs comparing water-related methods and air insufflation during the insertion phase of colonoscopy raises challenging questions regarding the approach. This report reviews the impact of water exchange on the variation in attenuation of pain during colonoscopy by water-related methods. METHODS: Medline (2008 to 2011) searches, abstracts of the 2011 Digestive Disease Week (DDW) and personal communications were considered to identify RcTs that compared water-related methods and air insufflation to aid insertion of the colonoscope. Results: Since 2008 nine published and one submitted RcTs and five abstracts of RcTs presented at the 2011 DDW have been identified. Thirteen RcTs (nine published, one submitted and one abstract, n=1850) described reduction of pain score during or after colonoscopy (eleven reported statistical significance); the remaining reports described lower doses of medication used, or lower proportion of patients experiencing severe pain in colonoscopy performed with water-related methods compared with air insufflation (Tables 1 and 2). The water-related methods notably differ in the timing of removal of the infused water - predominantly during insertion (water exchange) versus predominantly during withdrawal (water immersion). Use of water exchange was consistently associated with a greater attenuation of pain score in patients who did not receive full sedation (Table 3). CONCLUSION: The comparative data reveal that a greater attenuation of pain was associated with water exchange than water immersion during insertion. The intriguing results should be subjected to further evaluation by additional RcTs to elucidate the mechanism of the pain-alleviating impact of the water method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fw Leung
- Sepulveda ACC, VAGLAHS, North Hill, CA; USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|