A randomized controlled study on carbon dioxide insufflation during ERCP
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-5232.2011.12.003
- VernacularTitle:二氧化碳注气在ERCP诊疗中的应用价值研究
- Author:
Ying HUANG
;
Hongxiang GU
;
Zhihui GUO
;
Ling JIANG
;
Qingwen ZHENG
;
Yang BAI
;
Bo JIANG
;
Fachao ZHI
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Cholangiopancreatography,endoscopic retrograde;
Carbon dioxide;
Abdominal pain;
Abdominal distension
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy
2011;28(12):664-667
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) insufflation during ERCP.MethodsBetween January and August 2011,a total of 102 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP were randomized to accept CO2 insufflation ( n =52 ) of air insufflation ( n =50 ) during the procedure.ERCP was carried out with the same instrument by an expert endoscopist who was blinded to the insufflation gas used and the procedure was controlled at 30 minutes to 1 hour.The heart rate,oxygen saturation of the patient was continuously monitored during the procedure.Before the procedure and 1 hour after the end of operation,abdominal X-ray was taken to evaluate the width of intestine,and the degree of intestinal expansion was defined as normal,mild,moderate and severe according to the width increased.A questionnaire with 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to quantify the abdominal pain and distention experienced at 1 hour,2 hours,and 6 hours after the procedure.The patients' vital signs,bowel dilatation,the average operating time,abdominal pain score and distention score on VAS,and complications in 2 groups were analyzed.ResultsThe baseline characteristics of 2 groups were comparable.ERCP was successfully performed in all the patients and no complication was observed.In CO2 group,the average operating time,mean heart rate and oxygen saturation were (45.2 ± 10.6) min,( 102.2 ± 10.3 ) bpm and ( 99.5 ± 0.5)％,which were (48.5 ± 11.2) min,( 100.3 ± 11.4) bpm and (98.9 ±0.6)％,respectively,in air group.There were no significant differences on these items between the 2 groups ( P ＞ 0.05 ).Moderate to severe intestinal expansion 1 hour after ERCP was found in 14 patients (26.9％ ) in CO2 group and in 28 patients (56.0％ ) in air group,and the latter was significantly higher than the former (x2 =11.61,P =0.009).Both of the mean abdominal pain and abdominal distention scores at 1 hour post-ERCP in CO2 group were lower than those in air group,but without significant difference (P ＞0.05).However,the mean abdominal pain scores at 2 hours and 6 hours post-ERCP in CO2 group were significantly lower than those of patients in air group (7.4 ±2.2 vs.18.7 ±4.6 at 2 hours post-ERCP,9.6 ±3.7 vs.20.1 ±4.5 at 6 hours post-ERCP,all P ＜ 0.05 ).Similarly,the mean abdominal distention scores at 2 hours and 6 hours post-ERCP in CO2 group were significant lower than those of patients in air group (7.6 ±3.6 vs.18.3 ±4.1 at 2 hours post-ERCP,8.9 ±3.7 vs.19.4 ±4.2 at 6 hours post-ERCP,all P ＜0.05).ConclusionThe use of CO2 insufflation instead of air during ERCP appears to be safe.Insufflation of CO2 during ERCP palliates the intestinal expansion,post-ERCP abdominal pain and distention comparison to insufflation of air.However,because of the single-center clinical observation with limited number of cases,the safety and efficacy of CO2insufflation during ERCP requires to be further evaluated.
