A Comparative Study for Usefulness of a Variable-Stiffness Colonoscope to a Conventional Colonoscope.
- Author:
Young Koog CHEON
1
;
In Sup JUNG
;
Young Deok CHO
;
Jin Oh KIM
;
Moon Sung LEE
;
Chan Sup SHIM
Author Information
1. Digestive Disease Center, Institute for Digestive Research, Soon Chun Hyang University, College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. schidr@hosp.sch.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Variable stiffness colonoscope;
Cecal intubation time
- MeSH:
Cecum;
Colonoscopes*;
Colonoscopy;
Endoscopes;
Humans;
Intubation;
Pliability
- From:Korean Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
2002;25(3):132-136
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Loop formation during colonoscopy can adversely effect on completion rates, speed of intubation and patient tolerance of the procedure. The ability to vary endoscope shaft flexibility may help insertion to the cecum. The aim was to compare a variable colonoscope with adjustable shaft stiffness to a conventional colonoscope (CC). METHODS: Consecutive patients attending for day case colonoscopy were randomized for examination with either the conventional colonoscope (Olympus CF200Z) or a variable stiffness (VS) colonoscope (CFQ240AL). The time to the cecum, inserted length of scope at cecum, need for abdominal compression, need for rotation of body position and pain scores of patient were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 158 cases, 69 were performed with the CC, and 89 with VS. There was no difference in intubation time between VS (mean 5.15+/-2.61 min) and CC (6.01+/-3.31 min) in experienced group. However, intubation time was quicker with VS than with CC (VS: 8.48+/-5.59, CC: 11.58+/-4.70, p=0.039) and number of loop formation was less with VS (mean 1.20) than with CC (mean 1.84) (p=0.043) in trainee group. There were no significant differences in inserted length of scope at cecum, need for abdominal compression, pain score or need for patient rotation between VS and CC in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in cecal intubation time between two groups in experienced group. However, in trainee group, the intubation time was quicker and the number of loop formation were lower in VS group than CC group.
