SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Colonoscopy”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources

PubMed1995

Flexible sigmoidoscopy plus air-contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy for evaluation of symptomatic patients without evidence of bleeding.

One hundred forty-nine patients aged 40 years or more with symptoms suggestive of colonic disease but without evidence of gastrointestinal bleeding (absence of hematochezia, normal serum levels of hemoglobin, and at least one test negative for fecal occult blood) were randomized to undergo either initial colonoscopy or initial flexible sigmoidoscopy plus air-contrast barium enema. Patients with incomplete initial colonoscopy and certain patients with polyps seen on flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema underwent the alternative procedure (barium enema or colonoscopy). The main results were as follows: First, the overall prevalence of cancer in the study was very low (0.67%). Second, initial flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema detected more patients with diverticulosis than did initial colonoscopy (46% versus 31%; p = .01). Initial colonoscopy detected more persons with adenomas (p = .06) than did initial flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema. Patients undergoing initial flexible sigmoidoscopy plus barium enema require the alternative procedure (24%) than were patients undergoing initial colonoscopy (6%; p = .002). Third, sensitivity analyses suggested that for most areas in the United States, initial colonoscopy would be more cost-effective for the outcomes of detection of adenomas and detection of large adenomas, although very few patients in the study had large adenomas. We conclude that the prevalence of colorectal cancer in persons with colonic symptoms but no evidence of bleeding is low and is comparable with the prevalence in an asymptomatic population. Cost-effective selection of imaging strategies in this population can be based on demographic factors such as age and sex, which are better predictors of the presence of adenomas than are symptoms.

Adenoma↗

PubMed2002

The role of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy in the diagnosis and management of lower gastrointestinal disorders: technique, indications, and contraindications.

Flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy have revolutionized the clinical management of colonic diseases. Colonoscopy has a broad range of indications, including evaluating lower GI symptoms such as lower GI bleeding, evaluating abnormal radiographic findings, and screening and surveillance for colon cancer. Colonoscopy is increasingly being used therapeutically. Patient evaluation, patient instructions, and colonic preparation before colonoscopy are essential for safe and efficient colonoscopy. Intravenous sedation reduces patient pain and anxiety during colonoscopy, but requires monitoring by pulse oximetry and automated measurements of vital signs. An experienced colonoscopist can complete colonoscopy in 90% or more of cases, using maneuvers to maintain the colonic lumen in view, straighten the colonoscope, and avoid looping during colonic intubation.

Colonic Diseases↗

PubMed2005

Significance of patient-controlled sedation during colonoscopy. Results from a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: In France, general anesthesia is given to more than 90% of patients undergoing colonoscopy although in several countries sedation is limited to intolerant patients. This study was carried out to determine whether Patient-Controlled Sedation (PCS) could provide a lighter sedation than general anesthesia adapted to the patient's individual requirement. METHODS: Patients aged from 18 to 80 scheduled for elective colonoscopy were prospectively randomized to receive either standard sedation (control group) or patient-controlled-sedation (PCS). In the control group, patients received a continuous infusion of propofol. Patients in the PCS group were connected to an infusion pump containing propofol and self-administered 20-mg boluses as often as they required. An anesthetist was present throughout the procedure. Patient satisfaction measured on a visual analog scale four hours after colonoscopy was the main outcome criterion. RESULTS: From December 2002 to September 2003, 402 patients underwent elective colonoscopy, 173 of them were eligible and were asked to participate in the study. Seventy-two gave their informed consent and were prospectively randomized. The patients' mean satisfaction scores were not statistically different between the two groups: 84.7 mm (PCS group) vs. 91.5 mm (control group); P = 0.24. Mean doses of propofol (60 mg vs. 248 mg; P <0.001), depth of sedation and time before discharge (1.75 hours vs. 4.45 hours) were significantly lower for patients in the PCS group; nine of them (25.7%) did not use the pump and had total colonoscopy without sedation. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding total duration of colonoscopy (19.4 min (PCS) vs. 18 min (control)) difficulty and therapeutic procedures (biopsy or polypectomy). Two weeks after the procedure, 96.5% of patients in the PCS group were willing to repeat the examination under the same conditions vs. 72.5% of patients in the control group (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that need of sedation is widely overestimated in France. A subset of our patients is willing to consider colonoscopy without general anesthesia. For them, PCS with propofol is an effective and very well accepted form of sedation.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: To date, computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been compared with an imperfect test, colonoscopy, and has been mainly assessed in patients with positive screening test results or symptoms. Therefore, the available data may not apply to screening of patients with a personal or family history of colorectal polyps or cancer (increased risk). We prospectively investigated the ability of CT colonography to identify individuals with large (>or=10 mm) colorectal polyps in consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. METHODS: A total of 249 consecutive patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer underwent CT colonography before colonoscopy. Two reviewers interpreted CT colonography examinations independently. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined after meticulous matching of CT colonography with colonoscopy. Unexplained large false-positive findings were verified with a second-look colonoscopy. RESULTS: In total, 31 patients (12%) had 48 large polyps at colonoscopy. This included 8 patients with 8 large polyps that were overlooked initially and detected at the second-look colonoscopy. In 6 of 8 patients, the missed polyp was the only large lesion. With CT colonography, 84% of patients (26/31) with large polyp(s) were identified, paired for a specificity of 92% (200-201/218). Positive and negative predictive values were 59%-60% (26/43-44) and 98% (200-201/205-206), respectively. CT colonography detected 75%-77% (36-37/48) of large polyps, with 9 of the missed lesions being flat. CONCLUSIONS: CT colonography and colonoscopy have a similar ability to identify individuals with large polyps in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. The large proportion of missed flat lesions warrants further study.

Aged↗

PubMed1999

Colonoscopy services in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Provision of a reasonable colonoscopy service requires approximately 160 procedures per 100000 population per year. The aim of the present study was to document current levels of colonoscopy service, the use of guidelines in surveillance practice and the capacity for expansion in endoscopy units throughout the United Kingdom. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to 294 endoscopy units. RESULTS: Replies were received from 164 units (60 %). Of the units, 49 % have reached the calculated target figure. In units not meeting the target, 22% have only one colonoscopist, and 31% have one colonoscopy session a week. Overall, 50 % of units are working at full capacity. Out of all units, 70 % are unable to expand their service further, because of lack of nursing support in 81%, non-availability of endoscopist in 72 % and lack of physical space in 51%. Guidelines for surveillance colonoscopy were a problem: 51% of units reported that guidelines were available for surveillance of ulcerative colitis, 28 % for Crohn's disease, 59 % for polyp follow-up, and 44 % for follow-up of resected colorectal cancer. The majority of units (>70%) had no protocols for their surveillance practice. Nonetheless, 92% of units performed surveillance colonoscopy for ulcerative colitis, 34% for Crohn's disease, and 76% for resected colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The colonoscopy service has expanded, but there are constraints on further growth. There is a pressing need for national guidelines on surveillance colonoscopy.

Colitis, Ulcerative↗

PubMed2001

Assessment of colorectal lesions using magnifying colonoscopy and mucosal dye spraying: can significant lesions be distinguished?

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Assessing the nature of lesions at the time of colonoscopy is important, and magnifying colonoscopy allows examination of mucosal crypt patterns. In this study, we assessed mucosal crypt patterns to see whether we could predict the histological findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study of total colonoscopy using magnifying colonoscopy involved 4445 patients between December 1993 and July 1998 at the National Cancer Center Hospital East. The mucosal crypt patterns of 3438 lesions were observed under magnifying colonoscopy with 0.2% indigo carmine solution, and classified according to a modified Kudo classification (type I to V). After endoscopic or surgical resection (3291 cases and 147 cases, respectively), histopathological examination was performed. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of magnifying endoscopy for non-neoplastic lesions was 75% (117/157), for adenomatous polyps it was 94% (3006/3186), and for invasive carcinomas it was 85 % (81/95). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of magnifying colonoscopy and dye spraying is helpful in determining the nature of colonic lesions as non-neoplastic, adenomas, or invasive carcinomas. Therefore it may be possible to determine, at the time of colonoscopy, which lesions require no treatment, which can be removed endoscopically, and which should be removed by surgery.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2004

Effects of colonoscopy on intracranial pressure: observation in a large animal model.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Increased intra-abdominal pressure has been associated with increased intracranial pressure. Bowel insufflation during colonoscopy may increase the intra-abdominal pressure. It was hypothesized that colonoscopy may be associated with intracranial pressure elevation subsequent to an elevation in intra-abdominal pressure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Colonoscopy was carried out in seven anesthetized pigs, and the colonoscope was advanced up to 60 cm from the anal verge. Insufflation was used to allow safe advancement of the colonoscope and to allow visualization of the colon, in the same way as in the procedure performed in humans. Intra-abdominal pressure was measured by determining the hydrostatic pressure in the urinary bladder. A subarachnoid screw was used to monitor intracranial pressure. The mean arterial blood pressure and intra-abdominal venous pressure were directly monitored via the femoral vessel access; all parameters were recorded before and during colonoscopy. RESULTS: A statistically significant elevation in intracranial pressure was demonstrated during colonoscopy. The average increase in intracranial pressure was 3.1 mm Hg. The intra-abdominal pressure and intra-abdominal venous pressure were also significantly elevated during the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy may increase intracranial pressure due to an increase in intra-abdominal pressure. This may have clinical implications when colonoscopy is conducted in patients with brain pathology associated with high intracranial pressure.

Anesthesia, General↗

PubMed2005

Gastroenterologists overestimate the appropriateness of colonoscopies they perform: an international observational study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Little is known about how gastroenterologists perceive the appropriateness of colonoscopies they perform. The objective of this study was to compare the appropriateness and necessity of colonoscopies as assessed by an expert panel and by the gastroenterologists performing the colonoscopies. METHODS: This observational study included 21 centers in 11 countries. Patients referred for colonoscopy were consecutively included. Appropriateness and necessity of colonoscopies were independently rated on a 9-point scale by the gastroenterologists performing them and by an expert panel using a validated method (RAND). The differences between the ratings from the two groups were examined. RESULTS: 6004 patients were included in the study. Comparisons of ratings were possible for 5381 (89.6 %) patients. The gastroenterologists' mean appropriateness rating was 7.2 +/- 1.7, and the panel's mean appropriateness rating was 5.4 +/- 2.3 ( P < 0.001). The percentages of indications rated inappropriate, uncertain, appropriate, and necessary were 4.1 %, 23.8 %, 14.2 %, and 58.0 % for the gastroenterologists and 27.2 %, 26.7 %, 25.0 %, and 21.1 % for the panel, respectively. Agreement between the two groups' ratings was poor (28.8 %, kappa = 0.11). Differences between the two groups' ratings decreased with increasing patient age, decreasing health status, and decreasing expertise level of the referring physician. However, the gastroenterologists produced consistently higher ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with an expert panel, gastroenterologists tend to overestimate the appropriateness of colonoscopies they perform. Except for well-delineated reasons, participating gastroenterologists weighed patient characteristics differently from the panel when judging appropriateness. Ways to increase the prospective use of appropriateness criteria in order to improve appropriateness and reduce overuse of colonoscopies should be examined further.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Development and validation of a multiple-choice question paper in basic colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Factual knowledge underpins competence in all clinical skills. A multiple-choice question paper (MCQ) was designed as part of an accelerated colonoscopy training week (ACTW). In the United Kingdom, there are no validated methods of assessing core knowledge in colonoscopy. The aims of this study were to develop an MCQ paper, to demonstrate its construct validity, and to establish whether the ACTW improved core knowledge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two 30-question MCQ papers (A and B) were designed. Delegates attending the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) 2004 meeting responded either to MCQ paper A or B. Demographic data were collected on their experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending the ACTW completed either MCQ paper A or B before the course, and the other paper after the course. RESULTS: Seventy-eight delegates at the BSG meeting completed the MCQ. There was a significant difference in the scores between those who had carried out less than 200 colonoscopies (mean 32.5 %) and those who had performed more than 200 (mean 58.4 %; P < 0.0001). Seventeen doctors attending the ACTW completed the MCQ. The mean score for papers A and B increased significantly following the course--57.2 % before the ACTW, 67 % after it ( P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This MCQ is capable of differentiating between endoscopists with different levels of experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending an ACTW significantly improve their knowledge in colonoscopy. A validated MCQ such as this could be used as part of the assessment process to ascertain competence in colonoscopy.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2006

Colonoscopy in elderly people is a safe procedure with a high diagnostic yield: a prospective comparative study of 2000 patients.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Optical colonoscopy is considered the gold standard for colorectal examination and has the advantage of allowing biopsies and polypectomy. However, the data on its safety and effectiveness in the elderly population are limited and somewhat conflicting. We prospectively assessed whether there are differences in completion rates, diagnostic yield, complication rates and 30-day mortality between patients aged > or = 65 years and patients aged < 65 undergoing colonoscopy at our centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 2000 colonoscopies performed over a 2-year period (January 2002 to January 2004). We compared 1000 consecutive colonoscopies in patients aged > or = 65 with 1000 consecutive colonoscopies in patients aged < 65 (control group). Data were collected on sedation; on completion rates, both crude and adjusted to discount failures due to obstructive disease; on diagnostic yield; complications, and on 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The median age was 75 years (51 % women) for the elderly group and 54 years (59 % women) for controls. The proportion of patients who received sedation was similar for both groups (59 % vs. 62 %, P = 0.97) but the mean dose of midazolam was lower in the elderly group (3.8 mg vs. 4.5 mg, P < 0.0001). The crude completion rate was lower for the elderly group (81.8 % vs. 86.5 %, P = 0.004), but the adjusted rate was similar for both groups (88.1 % elderly vs. 87.6 % control, P = 0.18). The overall diagnostic yield was higher in the elderly group (65 % vs. 45 %, P < 0.0001) with higher rates of carcinoma detected (7.1 % vs. 1.3 %, P < 0.0001). The complication rate was low (0.2 % per group). CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy in the elderly is safe and effective with a high diagnostic yield. Colonoscopy may now be the imaging modality of choice in the elderly population.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

Current sedation and monitoring practice for colonoscopy: an International Observational Study (EPAGE).

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Sedation and monitoring practice during colonoscopy varies between centers and over time. Knowledge of current practice is needed to ensure quality of care and help focus future research. The objective of this study was to examine sedation and monitoring practice in endoscopy centers internationally. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational study included consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy at 21 centers in 11 countries. Endoscopists reported sedation and monitoring practice, using a standard questionnaire for each patient. RESULTS: 6004 patients were included in this study, of whom 53 % received conscious/moderate sedation during colonoscopy, 30 % received deep sedation, and 17 % received no sedation. Sedation agents most commonly used were midazolam (47 %) and opioids (33 %). Pulse oximetry was done during colonoscopy in 77 % of patients, blood pressure monitoring in 34 %, and electrocardiography in 24 %. Pulse oximetry was most commonly used for moderately sedated patients, while blood pressure monitoring and electrocardiography were used predominantly for deeply sedated patients. Sedation and monitoring use ranged from 0 % to 100 % between centers. Oxygen desaturation (</= 85 %) occurred in 5 % of patients, of whom 80 % were moderately sedated. On average, three staff members were involved in procedures. An anesthesiologist was present during 27 % of colonoscopies, and during 85 % of colonoscopies using deep sedation. CONCLUSIONS: Internationally, sedation and monitoring practice during colonoscopy varied widely. Moderate sedation was the most common sedation method used and electronic monitoring was used in three-quarters of patients. Deep sedation tended to be more resource-intensive, implying a greater use of staff and monitoring.

Blood Pressure Determination↗

PubMed1994

Nitrous oxide for colonoscopy discomfort: a randomized double-blind study.

The possibility of reducing recovery time after colonoscopy was studied using patient-administered nitrous oxide and comparing it with our standard treatment of ketobemidone plus midazolam. Fifty consecutive colonoscopy patients were randomized to receive either (i) intravenous ketobemidone hydrochloride 2.5 mg, midazolam 2.5 mg, and breathing air from a face mask with a demand valve (KHM) or (ii) intravenous saline and a breathing mixture of even parts of oxygen and nitrous oxide (Entonox) from the same valve setup. Patient discomfort during colonoscopy was assessed using visual analogue scales. All patients were allowed to stay for recovery as long as they wanted, and the time was measured. Modified recollection tests were performed prior to colonoscopy and when the patients left the Endoscopy Unit, in order to study the degree of mental impairment induced by the procedure and the medication. All patients had complete colonoscopies of the same duration in both groups. Discomfort during colonoscopy was rated the same in both groups (2p = 0.6413). Both groups of patients scored identically in the precolonoscopy recollection test. Most patients had a lower score after colonoscopy, but Entonox-treated patients scored significantly better than those with KHM (2p = 0.0250). Patients treated with Entonox opted to leave the Unit directly after the procedure (median 0 minutes; interquartile range 0-5 minutes) compared to 38 minutes for those with KHM (interquartile range 10-75 min), 2p < 0.001. It seems from our data that nitrous oxide gives pain relief equal to that in our standard treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗

PubMed2000

The measurement of forces exerted during colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: The widely varying forces used at colonoscopy have not been measured. An electronic device was designed to measure the forces exerted by the clinician on the endoscope during colonoscopy. METHODS: The device featured a handle designed in the shape of a hinged split cylinder that could be locked around the endoscope but readily moved up and down the insertion tube as the colonoscopy proceeded. This cylinder contained strain-gauges arranged so that the forces transmitted could be accurately measured. The device recorded the torque forces in addition to the push and pull forces exerted during diagnostic colonoscopy. RESULTS: In a series of 21 colonoscopies in 20 patients: peak pushing force = 4.4 kg, pulling force = -1.8 kg, anti-clockwise torque = 1.0 Newton meters, clockwise torque = 0.8 Newton meters. Percentage time force greater than 1 kg = 5%. Peak anal insertion force = 1.8 kg. CONCLUSIONS: These measurements represent the first accurate measurements of the forces exerted during colonoscopy. Reducing the force during colonoscopy is likely to diminish pain and reduce the risk of perforation. A knowledge of these forces may also help with the design of new instruments and models for teaching or research.

Adult↗

PubMed2000

Factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Successful colonoscopy depends on insertion of the instrument to the cecum, precise observation, and minimal patient discomfort during the procedure. The aim of this prospective study was to determine whether certain variables are associated with insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy. METHODS: Nine hundred nine consecutive colonoscopic examinations performed by a single endoscopist in patients without obstructive disease of the colorectum were analyzed. Four liters of Colonlyte (Taejun, Seoul, Korea) were used for bowel cleansing, and meperidine (25 mg) was administered intramuscularly 10 minutes before the procedure. The degree of patient discomfort was assessed using a 5-level Likert scale. RESULTS: Among 909 study patients, colonoscopy was completed to the cecum in 876 patients (96.4%). The adjusted completion rate was 98% and mean insertion time for complete colonoscopy was 6.9+/-4.2 minutes. Colonoscopy caused less patient discomfort than barium enema or esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that inadequate bowel cleansing, advanced age, and constipation as an indication are independent factors associated with prolonged insertion time (>10 minutes). Female gender was the only independent factor associated with significant discomfort (> or = level 4) during colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Among the factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy, unsatisfactory bowel preparation was the only correctable factor.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2001

Diagnostic yield of open access colonoscopy according to appropriateness.

BACKGROUND: Open-access endoscopy allows physicians to directly schedule endoscopic procedures for their patients without prior consultation. Evaluation of both appropriateness and diagnostic yield of endoscopic procedures is critical when assessing the costs and benefits of endoscopy in an open-access setting. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriate use of colonoscopy in an open-access system and to establish the yield of diagnostic information relevant to patient care. METHODS: Overall, 1123 consecutive patients referred for open-access colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled in the study. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines were used to assess the relationship between the appropriate use of colonoscopy and the presence of relevant endoscopic findings. RESULTS: The rate of colonoscopies "generally not indicated" according to ASGE guidelines was 29% (39% for primary care physicians and 23% for specialists; p < 0.0001). A relevant endoscopic finding was detected in 338 examinations (35%). The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for "generally indicated" colonoscopies (43%) compared with "generally not indicated" procedures (16%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of inappropriate use of colonoscopy was high, open-access colonoscopy was effective in detecting neoplastic lesions. Because most of these were detected during examinations performed for appropriate indications, the appropriateness of the indication emerges as crucial to the cost-effectiveness of an open-access system.

Colonic Diseases↗

PubMed2001

Factors predictive of difficult colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Prediction of a technically difficult colonoscopy may influence patient selection and procedure scheduling. Identification of predictive factors may be difficult because a common endpoint used to evaluate the success of colonoscopy is intubation of the cecum, which is usually achieved. The goal of this study was to examine the feasibility of using an alternative measure, time required for cecal intubation, to identify factors that can impact performance of colonoscopy. METHODS: The time required for cecal intubation was prospectively recorded for 802 consecutive outpatient colonoscopies performed by 7 experienced gastroenterologists. Patient data collected included height, weight, age, bowel habits, surgical history, and findings at colonoscopy. Forty-seven examinations that were stopped because of disease or unacceptable bowel preparation were excluded. The impact of the patient characteristics of the remaining sample of 755 patients on the median time required for cecal intubation for men and women was examined. RESULTS: Older age and female gender, body mass index < or =25.0 (regardless of gender), diverticular disease in women, and a history of constipation or reported laxative use in men were predictors of difficult colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: By using median time required for cecal intubation, several patient characteristics were identified that may predict technical difficulty at colonoscopy. These findings have implications for practice and teaching.

Age Factors↗

PubMed2002

Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Indirect evidence and modeling analyses suggest that colonoscopy may be the most cost-effective way to screen the average-risk population for colorectal neoplasia. However, the success and safety of primary colonoscopic screening has not been prospectively evaluated in a multicenter trial. METHODS: Asymptomatic subjects age 50 to 75 years who had not undergone examination of the colon within 10 years were recruited from the general medicine clinics of 13 Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Eligible patients underwent colonoscopy by study coinvestigators, at which time all polyps were measured, photographed, and removed. Patients were contacted at 24 hours and 1 week to track procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Primary screening colonoscopy was performed in a cohort of 3196 asymptomatic subjects. A "good" preparation was reported in 81% of patients, and colonoscopy to the cecum was successful in 97.2% of cases. Mean insertion time to the cecum and total procedure times were 10.5 (8.7) and 30.6 (19.1) minutes, respectively. No preprocedural patient characteristics were identified that were predictive of an incomplete procedure. At least one polyp was resected in 1672 patients. There was no perforation and no death attributed to colonoscopy. Major morbidity considered to be definitely related to colonoscopy occurred in 9 of 3196 procedures (0.3%): lower GI bleeding requiring intervention (6), myocardial infarction and/or cerebrovascular accident (2), and thrombophlebitis (1). In subjects undergoing only diagnostic procedures, the major complication rate was 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Screening colonoscopy can be performed in multiple centers with a high degree of success and safety in large numbers of asymptomatic, average-risk men.

Aged↗

PubMed2003

A comparison of magnifying and nonmagnifying colonoscopy for diagnosis of colorectal polyps: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Discrimination between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal polyps is essential for determining appropriate treatment. The mucosal crypt pattern of polyps can be observed with a nonmagnifying colonoscope; however, mucosal crypt patterns are better seen by magnifying colonoscopy, which can also be a noninvasive means for predicting histopathology. This study prospectively compared the ability to distinguish between neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions by magnifying and nonmagnifying colonoscopy. METHODS: Six hundred sixty patients were randomly assigned to undergo magnifying or nonmagnifying colonoscopy (2 groups each of 330 patients). The mucosal crypt pattern of colorectal lesions was classified into types I through V after spraying with 0.2% Indigo carmine dye. The histopathology of all lesions was confirmed by evaluation of endoscopic resection specimens or biopsy specimens. Only lesions 10 mm or less in diameter were included in the study. RESULTS: The accuracy of magnifying colonoscopy in distinguishing neoplastic from non-neoplastic lesions (92%, 372/405) was significantly higher than for nonmagnifying colonoscopy (68%, 278/407). Insertion of magnifying and nonmagnifying colonoscopes to the cecum was successful in, respectively, 321 patients (97%) and 317 patients (96%), with no significant differences in the average time to reach the cecum or average total procedure time. No serious complication was observed during or immediately after the examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Observation of mucosal crypt pattern with magnifying colonoscopy is superior to nonmagnifying colonoscopy for distinguishing between neoplastic and non-neoplastic colorectal lesions.

Colonic Polyps↗