A novel device for rapid cleaning of poorly prepared colons

Background: Adequate colon preparation is essential for the quality and accuracy of colonoscopy and has a significant influence on related costs. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a novel attachable colon-cleaning device used during colonoscopies in porcine colon.

Methods: The ClearPath device consists of a multilumen extruded tube with channels for water irrigation and evacuation designed to allow the break up and removal of stool remnants during colonoscopy. Seven female domestic swine underwent several series of experiments in which partial bowel preparation followed by a sedated colonoscopy using the new device was performed.

Results: Between February 2008 and October 2008, a total of 57 colonoscopic procedures were conducted. The device enabled rapid cleaning of the partially prepared porcine colon with no immediate or delayed adverse consequences.

Conclusions: Use of the ClearPath device was found to be a simple, reliable, and safe method for intraprocedural cleaning of partly prepared porcine colon. These experiments support a potential role for ClearPath in cleaning the colon in unprepared or poorly prepared human patients.

References

• 1 DiPalma J A. Preparation for colonoscopy. In: Waye JD, Rex KD, Williams CB, eds. Colonoscopy principles and practice. Oxford; Blackwell Publishing 2003: 210-219
• 2 Toledo T K, DiPalma J A. Colon cleansing preparation for gastrointestinal procedures.  Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2001;  15 605-611
• 3 ASGE Technology Status Evaluation Report. Colonoscopy preparations.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;  54 829-832
• 4 Neidich R L, Zuckerman G R. Patient preparation. In: Raskin JB, Nord HJ, eds. Colonoscopy principles and techniques. New York; Igaku-Shoin 1995: 53-82
• 5 Burke C, Church J. Enhancing the quality of colonoscopy: the importance of bowel purgatives.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  66 565-573
• 6 Rex D K, Imperiale T F, Latinovich D R, Bratcher L L. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 1696-1700
• 7 Bowles C J, Leicester R, Romaya C. et al . A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the U.K. today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?.  Gut. 2004;  53 277-283
• 8 Aslinia F, Uradomo L, Steele A. et al . Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: an analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;  101 721-731
• 9 Harewood G C, Sharma V K, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 76-79
• 10 Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers J J. et al . Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: The European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  61 378-384
• 11 Ben-Horin S, Bar-Meir S, Avidan B. The outcome of a second preparation for colonoscopy after preparation failure in the first procedure.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;  69 626-630
• 12 Leung F W, Amazonian H S, Leung J W. et al . Impact of a novel water method on scheduled unsedated colonoscopy in U.S. veterans.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;  69 546-50