Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-2002-33442
Use of a Variable-Stiffness Colonoscope Allows Completion of Colonoscopy after Failure with the Standard Adult Colonoscope
Publication History
Submitted: 23 January 2001
Accepted after Revision: 25 April 2002
Publication Date:
26 August 2002 (online)
Background and Study Aims: Experts fail to reach the cecum in 2 - 10 % of colonoscopies. The purpose of this case series was to evaluate the efficacy of a small-caliber, variable-stiffness colonoscope in patients with incomplete colonoscopy.
Patients and Methods: The variable-stiffness colonoscope (Olympus America XPCF-140AL) was used by the same examiner to reattempt colonoscopy immediately in all patients in whom colonoscopy to the cecum with the standard colonoscope was incomplete.
Results: Sixteen of 385 attempted colonoscopies (4.2 %) did not reach the cecum with the standard colonoscope due to looping (n = 12), fixed angulation of the sigmoid colon (n = 3), and diverticulosis (n = 1). The procedures were deemed a failure after a mean of 28 min, despite the use of abdominal pressure and positional change in all patients. Fifteen of the 16 patients (94 %) had a complete colonoscopy with the variable-stiffness colonoscope. One patient had an incomplete colonoscopy with the variable-stiffness colonoscope due to an obstructing mass in the transverse colon that was not reached by the standard colonoscope. With the variable-stiffness colonoscope, the mean time to cecal intubation was 10.3min; four patients (25 %) required a change in patient position, and six patients (37.5 %) required abdominal pressure.
Conclusions: A variable-stiffness colonoscope allowed completion of colonoscopy in all patients without obstruction who had an incomplete colonoscopy with the standard colonoscope. Further study is needed to determine whether the variable-stiffness colonoscope should be used routinely for colonoscopy.
References
- 1 Church J M. Complete colonoscopy: How often? And if not, why not?. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994; 89 556-560
- 2 Marshall J B, Barthel J S. The frequency of total colonoscopy and terminal ileal intubation in the 1990s. Gastrointest Endosc. 1993; 39 518-520
- 3 Waye J D, Bashkoff E. Total colonoscopy: Is it always possible?. Gastrointest Endosc. 1991; 37 152-154
- 4 Lehman G A. Upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: Are thinner endoscopes preferable?. Endoscopy. 1996; 28 436-437
- 5 Saiffudin T, Trivedi M, King P D. et al . Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for colonoscopy in adults. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 51 314-317
- 6 Kozarek R A, Botoman V A, Patterson D J. Prospective evaluation of a small caliber upper endoscope for colonoscopy after unsuccessful standard examination. Gastrointest Endosc. 1989; 35 333-335
- 7 Bat L, Williams C B. Usefulness of pediatric colonoscopes in adult colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1989; 35 329-332
- 8 Lichtenstein G R, Park P D, Long W B. et al . Use of a push enteroscope improves ability to perform total colonoscopy in previously unsuccessful attempts at colonoscopy in adult patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999; 94 187-190
- 9 Marshall J B. Use of a pediatric colonoscope improves success of total colonoscopy in selected adult patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996; 44 675-678
- 10 Brooker J C, Saunders B P, Shah S G, Williams C B. A new variable stiffness colonoscope makes colonoscopy easier: A randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2000; 46 801-805
- 11 Howell D A, Ku P M, Desilets D J, Campana J M. A comparative trial of variable stiffness colonoscopes [abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 51 AB58 (abstract 2448)
R. M. Katon, M.D.
Division of Gastroenterology, PV-310 · Oregon Health Sciences University ·
3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road · Portland, OR 97201-3098 · USA ·
Fax: + 1-503-494-7556
Email: katonr@ohsu.edu