View clinical trials related to Colonoscopy.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to evaluate patient experience ratings of BLI800 in adult patients undergoing colonoscopy.
Bowel preparation is closely llined to the quality of colonoscopy, inadequate bowel preparation (IBP) could lead to higher miss rate of adenomas, patients' discomfort and higher health expense. For the patients with possible IBP before the examination, it may be better to cancel the colonoscopy and repeat bowel preparation through modified or enhanced strategies. Thus, it is important to set up a model to predict the quality of bowel preparation individually.
All subjects shall sign informed consent before screening, and subjects shall be included according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of four endoscopists were included in the study, two in each group of senior endoscopists and two in each group of junior endoscopists. Patients were randomly enrolled into the senior endoscopy group and the junior endoscopy group, and received artificial intelligence assisted colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy successively. The two colonoscopy methods were performed back to back by different endoscopy physicians with the same seniority. All patients were examined and treated according to routine medical procedures. The routine colonoscopy group and the artificial-intelligence-assisted colonoscopy group made detailed records of the patients' withdrawal time, entry time, number of polyps detected, polyp Paris classification, polyp size, polyp shape, polyp location and intestinal preparation during the colonoscopy process
Comparison of the number of adenomas missed by the first exploration of the right colon by LCI (linked color imaging) or by white light during a colonoscopy, according to the order of randomization.
The rate of adequate bowel preparation is one of important quality indicators of colonoscopy. Inadeqaute bowel preparation negatively affects the outcomes of colonoscopy. If patients with inadequate bowel preparation were identified before the procedure, enhanced strategy could be offerred to achieve better bowel cleasing. Currently, there were three predicting models of inadequate bowel preparation eatablished based on patient-related factors. It remains unclear which model perfroms better in predicting bowel preparation quality. Futhermore, althought those predicting models only composing of patients-related factors are useful for identifing high-risk patients, the preparation-related factors may also be valuable for prediciting inadeqaute bowel preparation before the procedure of colonoscopy. This study aimed: 1) to compare the values of three availlable models (based on patient-related factors) in predicting inadeqaute bowel preparation in a prospective, multicentered cohort of patients undergoing colonoscopy; 2) to investigate whether a new model based on preparation-related or a combined model based on patient-related and preparation-related factors is comparable to previous models based on patient-related factors.
Missing polyps during colonoscopy is considered an important factor for interval cancer appearance especially in the ascending colon (AC). Aim of the study: To evaluate the contribution of retroflexion to adenoma detection in the AC. Patients-Methods: Prospective observational study included consecutive patients with complete colonoscopy between June 2017 and June 2018. The AC was examined in two phases. The first phase included two forward views from the hepatic flexure to the cecum and the second phase a retroflexion in the cecum, inspection till the hepatic flexure then redressing to forward view and reinsertion to the cecum.
About 50-70% only of inpatients who undergo colonoscopy have an adequate bowel cleansing, which is far below the recommended threshold of 90%. Variables associated to inadequate colon preparation have not been assessed yet. Identifying such variables would allow to augment the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy, and also to reduce costs related to the need to repeat colonoscopy. Aim of the present study is to find variables independently associated to an inadequate bowel cleansing and to subsequently build and validate a predictive model, which could prove useful in clinical practice to identify hard-to-prepare inpatients. Secondary endpoints are (i) to assess the proportion of patients with inadequate colon cleansing, (ii) to run a cost-effectiveness analysis between patients with adequate cleansing and patients who need to repeat colonoscopy. Patients undergoing urgent colonoscopy, and patients who take the preparation at home will be excluded.
104 patients who undergo painless colonoscopy from Decemenber 1,2019 to June 30,2022 will be randomized to two groups: propofol group and dexmedetomidine group. In the dexmedetomidine group,dexmedetomidine was infusion intravenously with a loading dose of 0.5 μg kg-1 for 10 min, then infusion at 0.3 μg kg-1 h-1 according to the ideal body weight of the patient until the end of colonoscopy. In the propofol group, Propofol was administrated 1 mg kg-1 intravenously, then titrated given by 0.5 mg kg-1 during the whole process.
This study compares different approaches to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (≥20mm) in a 2 x 2 randomized design. The first randomization will assign half of patients to polyp resection with electrocautery ("hot" snare EMR) and half of patient to polyp resection without electrocautery ("cold" snare EMR). The second randomization will assign half of patients to polyp removal using Eleview as the submucosal injection agent, and the other half using placebo (normal saline with methylene blue) as the submucosal injection agent.
Colonoscopy is an important diagnostic and therapeutic tool in colon disorders. Different drugs and levels of sedation can be used in its accomplishment. There is no consensus on which is the ideal. The aim of this study was to compare the post anesthetic recovery time between patients deeply sedated with midazolam and propofol or fentanyl and propofol. 50 American Society of Anesthesiologist physical state (ASA) I and II candidates elective colonoscopy at Luxembourg Hospital were divided into two groups A) midazolam and propofol or B) fentanyl and propofol. Time of examination, post anesthetic recovery and discharge at home, intercurrence and propofol consumption were compared.