Colonoscopy Clinical Trial
Official title:
Comparisons of Sigmoid-colon Water Immersion, the Whole Colon Water Immersion and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Insufflation on Cecal Intubation Time in Potentially Difficult Colonoscopy by Difficult Colonoscopy Score(DCS) >1.
Colonoscopy insertion is technically challenging, time-consuming, and painful, especially for
the sigmoid. It is reported that the difficult colonoscopy score (DCS) >1 can predict the
difficulty during colonoscopy. Patients with DCS>1 had longer insertion time, higher pain
score and needed more abdominal compression and position changes. As reported, water-aided
method colonoscopy examination is an important and useful method because it reduces
discomfort and increases cecal intubation rate compared with usual air insufflation method.
But a longer time was consumed for scope insertion and cecal intubation in the traditional
water-aided method colonscopy(the whole water immersion). To avoid these disadvantages ,we
modified whole colon water immersion(WWI) method to the sigmoid colon water immersion(SWI),
where the most difficult and painful part of colonoscopy resides. If water immersion is
limited to the sigmoid colon in such patients, would it be more efficient and less time
consuming?
The aim of this study was to investigate the application of water-aided method on cecal
intubation time in potentially difficult colonoscopy. This prospective, randomized controlled
study allocated patients who's difficult colonoscopy score(DCS) >1 (18-80 years) to
sigmoid-colon water immersion(SWI), whole colon water immersion(WWI) or carbon dioxide (CO2)
insufflation (CI) group (1:1:1). The primary outcome was cecal intubation time. The secondary
outcomes included the maximum pain score (0=none,10=most severe) during the insertion phase
in left, transverse and right colon; cecal intubation rate; adenoma detection rate(ADR);
bowel preparation quality; withdrawal time(from cecum to rectum excluding time for biopsy and
polypectomy); willingness to undergo a repeat unsedated colonoscopy; number of abdominal
compressions, position change during the insertion. Patients were educated to understand the
meaning of visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 = no pain, 10 = most severe) and to report their
maximum pain scores during the insertion through each colonic segment. Descriptive statistics
were used to summarize demographic and baseline data. Analyses were performed with SPSS
software version 24.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc, IBM Company).
Introduction: Colonoscopy insertion is technically challenging, time-consuming, and painful,
especially for the sigmoid. Many factors have been found to affect the difficulty of
colonoscope insertion, such as age, gender, body mass index, history of abdominal surgery and
operator ect. It is reported that the difficult colonoscopy score (DCS) >1 can predict the
difficulty during colonoscopy. DCS=1*A(1 if age≥65y, 0 if <65y) + 2*B (1 if BMI <18.5, 0 if
BMI≥18.5) + 1*C (1 if colonoscopist is junior, 0 if senior)+ 1*S(1 if sleep quality was fair
or bad, 0 if excellent or good). Patients with DCS>1 had longer insertion time, higher pain
score and needed more abdominal compression and position changes. For these potentially
difficult cases we can use special intubation techniques such as water-aided or cap-assisted
method at the very start to avoid of excessive insertion time, increased discomfort and even
unnecessary adverse events.
Water-aided method colonoscopy examination is an important and useful method because it
reduces discomfort and increases cecal intubation rate compared with usual air insufflation
method. This examination is usually performed using two different methods: water immersion
and water exchange. In the water immersion method, the water is infused into the colon
beginning with the scope inserted into the anus during examination until the scope reaches
the cecum. The water is evacuated during colonoscope withdrawal. In the water exchange
method, the water is evacuated during colonoscope advancement until the cecum is reached. The
air pump of the endoscopy machine is turned off during examination in both procedures. The
aim of this study was to investigate the application of water-aided method on cecal
intubation time in potentially difficult colonoscopy. We chose water immersion method rather
than water exchange for this evaluation because water immersion, characterized by suction
removal of the infused water predominantly during withdrawal, is more appropriate for
reducing the cecal intubation time. Further more ,as reported, left-colon water exchange(LWE)
shorten the insertion time while preserving the benefits of whole colon water exchange(WWE).
We modified whole colon water immersion(WWI) method to the sigmoid colon water
immersion(SWI), where the most difficult and painful part of colonoscopy resides. If water
immersion is limited to the sigmoid colon in such patients, would it be more efficient and
less time consuming? Methods:This prospective, randomized controlled study allocated patients
who's difficult colonoscopy score(DCS) >1 (18-80 years) to sigmoid-colon water
immersion(SWI), whole colon water immersion(WWI) or carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation (CI)
group (1:1:1). Patients were randomized to SWI, WWI or CI group according to a
computer-generated randomization list in 1:1:1 ratio. Group assignments were revealed
immediately before the insertion of colonoscopy by a researcher , who did not participate in
data collection and data analysis. The monitor screen was placed over the head of patients to
keep them from knowing the insertion method. Endoscopists and assisting nurses were not
blinded. For the bowel preparation, all patients were instructed to take low-fiber diet for
lunch and clear liquid diets for dinner the day before examination. They ingested 2L of PEG
powder (WanHe Pharmaceutical Co, Shenzhen, China) diluted with water within 2 h, between 4:00
AM and 5:00 AM on the day of the examination. Those with chronic constipation received an
additional 2L of PEG solution on the evening prior to the examination. Drinking more clear
water and pacing back and forth after purgatives were encouraged to enhance laxative effect.
The time interval between preparation and colonoscopy was limited to less than 5 h to ensure
the quality of bowel preparation.
Endoscopic procedure Two endoscopists (WBH and YJ) with extensive experience in both air
(>5000) and water methods (>500) performed the colonoscopies. The standard adult colonoscope
(EC-600WM, Fujinon, Beijing) was used. Patients were placed in the left lateral position at
the beginning of the procedure. Maneuvers such as abdominal compression and position change
were implemented if needed (e.g. when looping, paradoxical movement or lack of advancement
occurred). Successful cecal intubation was confirmed by the visualization of appendiceal
orifice or ileocecal valve with the tip of the colonoscope touching the base of the cecum.
For the AI method, air was insufflated through out the whole procedure for advancement and
inspection when needed. In the WWI method,the air supply was turn off until the cecum was
reached. For adequate lumen distention to advance the colonoscope tip, warm water which
stored in 1L bottles and maintained 37°C with a water bath, was instilled intermittently into
the colon through the auxiliary working channel of colonoscope using a footswitch-controlled
flushing pump. For patients allocated to SWI group, air pump would be turned off and the
procedure would be switched from water immersion method to air insufflation method after
successful passage through the descending sigmoid junction.
The primary outcome was cecal intubation time. The secondary outcomes included the maximum
pain score (0=none,10=most severe) during the insertion phase in left, transverse and right
colon; cecal intubation rate; adenoma detection rate (ADR); bowel preparation quality;
withdrawal time(from cecum to rectum excluding time for biopsy and polypectomy); willingness
to undergo a repeat unsedated colonoscopy; number of abdominal compressions, position change
during the insert.
Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographic and baseline data. Quantitative
variables are expressed as means and standard deviations and analyzed by ANOVA followed by
Bonferroni test for multiple comparisons. Categorical variables in three groups were compared
with chi-square test or Fisher exact test when appropriate. All p-Values were two-sided and
those < 0.05 were considered to be significant. Analyses were performed with SPSS software
version 24.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc, IBM Company).
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT04101097 -
Training and Validation of Models of Factors to Predict Inadequate Bowel Preparation Colonoscopy
|
||
Completed |
NCT03247595 -
Testing How Well Magnesium Citrate Capsules Work as Preparation for a Colonoscopy
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04214301 -
An Open-Label Preference Evaluation of BLI800
|
Phase 4 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT05754255 -
Comparison of High-flow Oxygen With or Without Nasal Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) During Propofol Sedation for Colonoscopy in an Ambulatory Surgical Center
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT02484105 -
Comforting Conversation During Colonoscopy: A Trial on Patient Satisfaction
|
Phase 4 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02264249 -
Residual Gastric Volume in Same Day Versus Split Dose and Evening Before Bowel Preparation
|
N/A | |
Terminated |
NCT01978509 -
The Affect of Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Hospitalized Patients Colonoscopies
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01964417 -
The Comparative Study Between Bowel Preparation Method
|
Phase 3 | |
Recruiting |
NCT01685970 -
Comparison of Same-day 2 Sachets Picosulfate Versus High Volume PEG for Afternoon Colonoscopy
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT01518790 -
Short Course, Single-dose PEG 3350 for Colonoscopy Prep in Children
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT00748293 -
Achievement of Better Examinee Compliance on Colon Cleansing Using Commercialized Low-Residue Diet
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00779649 -
MoviPrep® Versus HalfLytely®, Low-VolUme PEG Solutions for Colon Cleansing: An InvesTigator-blindEd, Randomized, Trial
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00671177 -
Clinical Evaluation of Water Immersion Colonoscopy Insertion Technique
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00380497 -
Pico-Salax Versus Poly-Ethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleanout Before Colonoscopy in Children
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT00160823 -
Impact of a Self-Administered Information Leaflet on Adequacy of Colonic Cleansing for in-Hospital Patients
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00314418 -
Patient Position and Impact on Colonoscopy Time
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT00390598 -
PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy
|
Phase 2/Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00427089 -
Comparison of 2L NRL994 With NaP Preparation in Colon Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopies for Colon Tumor Screening
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00209573 -
A Study of AQUAVAN® Injection Versus Midazolam HCl for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Elective Colonoscopy
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT05823350 -
The Effect of Abdominal Massage on Pain and Distention After Colonoscopy
|
N/A |