Juvenile polyps(JP),also known as retention polyps,are the most common type of colorectal polyps and the main cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding in children,with rare incidence in adults.In recent years,with the development and application of electronic colonoscopy,the detection rate of colorectal JP has gradually increased.It is generally accepted that JP is a benign hamartomatous lesion of the intestine,while it can cause complications such as massive hemorrhage of the lower digestive tract,anemia,intussusception,and intestinal obstruction.Moreover,there are reports about the canceration of JP.Therefore,it is necessary to improve the understanding and achieve early diagnosis and treatment of this disease.This article reviews the research progress in the epidemiological characteristics,pathogenesis,clinical manifestations,diagnosis and treatment methods,and canceration risk of JP.
Child ; Adult ; Humans ; Colonoscopy/adverse effects* ; Rectal Neoplasms ; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage

OBJECTIVEIn some hospitals an adult colonoscope is used for colon examination in children because they do not have child colonscope equipment. This has some disadvantages and this paper reports the experience for colon examination in children with an adult gastroscope instead of an adult colonoscope.

METHODSOne hundred and three children aged from 1.3 to 14 years who required routine colon examination were randomly assigned to adult gastroscope (n=49) and adult colonoscope groups (n=54).

RESULTSThere were no significant differences in the success rate of implantation into the ileocecum between the gastroscope and colonoscope groups (93.9% vs 94.4%; P>0.05). The average time of implantation into the ileocecum in the gastroscope group was shorter than that of the colonoscope group (5.2+/-1.1 min vs 7.3+/-2.9 min; P<0.05). Seventeen patients showed implantation-related complications in the colonoscope group but only 5 patients in the gastroscope group (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONSAn adult gastroscope appears to be safer and more feasible than an adult colonoscope for colon examination in children.

Adolescent ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Colonoscopes ; adverse effects ; Colonoscopy ; methods ; Female ; Gastroscopes ; adverse effects ; Humans ; Infant ; Male

A 48-year-old woman who was without any abnormal past medical history underwent colonoscopy as a screening procedure for colorectal disease. The procedure was uneventful and there was no sign of inflammation around the appendicular orifice or the luminal surface of the cecum. The patient did not complain of pain or significant discomfort throughout the procedure. She then developed pain in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen that evening and this persisted for four days. She visited the outpatient department and underwent abdominal ultrasonography, which showed a swollen appendix with a collection of pericecal fluid. Surgical exploration and appendectomy were performed; the final diagnosis was acute suppurative appendicitis. Colonoscopists should be aware of this rare complication and consider it when making the differential diagnosis of post-colonoscopy abdominal pain.
Acute Disease ; Appendicitis/diagnosis/*etiology/surgery ; Colonoscopy/*adverse effects ; Diagnosis, Differential ; Female ; Humans ; Middle Aged

No abstract available.
Colon/pathology/surgery ; Colonoscopy ; Female ; Humans ; Intestinal Perforation/*etiology ; Plastics ; Stents/*adverse effects

Adolescent ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Colonoscopy ; Female ; Gastrointestinal Agents ; pharmacology ; Humans ; Infant ; Lactulose ; adverse effects ; pharmacology ; Male

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influencing factors for the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy in children and the association of the interval from the last administration of laxative to the start of colonoscopy (shortly referred to as waiting time) with the quality of bowel preparation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for the children who were admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology, Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, from January to November 2020, and received bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder combined with diet control before colonoscopy. According to the score of Boston bowel preparation scale, they were divided into two groups: adequate bowel preparation group (n=337) and inadequate bowel preparation group (n=30). Related data were collected from the children in both groups, including general information, possible influencing factors for the quality of bowel preparation, adverse reactions associated with bowel preparation, duration of colonoscopy, and postoperative diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore the influencing factors for the quality of bowel preparation. RESULTS: The univariate analysis showed that age, body weight, and waiting time were associated with inadequate bowel preparation (P<0.05). The multivariate analysis showed that older age (OR=2.155, 95%CI: 1.087-4.273, P=0.028) and longer waiting time (OR=1.559, 95% CI: 1.191-2.041, P=0.001) were independent risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the cut-off value of waiting time was 5.5 hours in determining whether bowel preparation was adequate or not, with a sensitivity of 90.0%, a specificity of 50.7%, and an area under the ROC curve of 0.708. After grouping based on waiting time, it was found that the incidence rate of inadequate bowel preparation in the ≥5.5 hours group was significantly higher than that in the <5.5 hours group [14.0% (27/193) vs 1.7% (3/174), P<0.001]. CONCLUSIONS For children who use polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder combined with diet control for bowel preparation, older age is an independent risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy, which may be associated with an insufficient dose of polyethylene glycol in older children. Longer waiting time is also an independent risk factor for inadequate bowel preparation, and it is recommended that the waiting time should not exceed 5.5 hours.
Cathartics ; Child ; Colonoscopy ; Diet ; Electrolytes ; Humans ; Polyethylene Glycols/adverse effects* ; Powders ; Retrospective Studies

Acute pancreatitis is a serious disease with fatality rate up to 15%. We recently experienced a case of acute pancreatitis induced by multiple drugs in a patient with ulcerative colitis. A 20-year-old female visited with abdominal pain and hematochezia and diagnosed of ulcerative colitis. Sulfasalazine and prednisolone were used. However, acute pancreatitis occurred after 4 weeks of treatment with additional azathioprine treatment. Drug-induced pancreatitis was suspected, and she was recovered with conventional therapy for acute pancreatitis. Therefore, it was proposed that acute pancreatitis was induced by azathioprine. However, after the administration of sulfasalazine, pancreatitis relapsed. Furthermore, even the re-administration of 5-ASA and azathioprine induced relapse of acute pancreatitis. We concluded that acute pancreatitis was induced by multiple drugs in this patient with ulcerative colitis.
Acute Disease ; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects ; Antimetabolites/adverse effects ; Azathioprine/adverse effects ; Colitis, Ulcerative/diagnosis/*drug therapy ; Colonoscopy ; Female ; Humans ; Mesalamine/adverse effects ; Pancreatitis/*chemically induced/*diagnosis ; Sulfasalazine/adverse effects ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Young Adult

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colonoscopy is a painful procedure. Therefore conscious sedation is often used. However, the value of adding analgesics to sedatives has not been well evaluated. METHODS: The double blind, randomized controlled trial was carried out to compare patients' and endoscopist' assessments in both groups of patients: MP (Midazolam/Placebo) group (n=49) received midazolam plus placebo and MM (Midazolam/Meperidine) group (n=51) received midazolam plus meperidine. RESULTS: There was no significant difference of baseline characteristics except previous operation history. There were no significant difference of grade of tolerance, pain and willingness to another colonoscopy between the two groups. In endoscopist' satisfaction, the degree of difficulty was higher in MP group than in MM group (39.0 vs. 31.7,p<0.05). After the colonoscopy, systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and pulse rate were significantly decreased (p<0.05) in both groups. However, there was no difference in the degree of decrease between the two groups. The incidence of adverse effect was not different in the two groups. However, one case of orthostatic hypotension with presyncope was noted in MM group. CONCLUSIONS: Adding meperidine to the midazolam before the colonoscopy does not seem to bring more beneficial effect to patients, whereas endoscopist favored the use of both medications.
Adult ; Aged ; Analgesics, Opioid/*administration & dosage/adverse effects ; *Colonoscopy ; Comparative Study ; Double-Blind Method ; English Abstract ; Female ; Humans ; Hypnotics and Sedatives/*administration & dosage/adverse effects ; Male ; Meperidine/*administration & dosage/adverse effects ; Midazolam/*administration & dosage/adverse effects ; Middle Aged

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colonoscopy is the principal method for diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of colorectal disease. The study aimed to assess the incidence, clinical features, and management of colonoscopic perforations at a local general hospital. METHODS: A retrospective review of patient record was performed for all patients with iatrogenic colonic perforation after sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy between 1997 and 2007. RESULTS: In the 10-year period, 16,388 colonoscopic and sigmoidscopic procedure were performed. All 10 cases of procedure related colonic perforation were developed. Perforation occurred in 9 cases during therapeutic procedure; 5 cases due to polypectomy and 4 cases due to endoscopic submucosal dissection. Perforation occurred in one case during diagnostic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic procedure is a clear risk factor of colonic perforation. When colonic perforation occurs, we should be able to make early diagnosis. Early diagnosis can lead to a good treatment and can produce good prognosis with short hospital days.
Colonic Diseases/diagnosis/epidemiology/*etiology ; Colonoscopy/*adverse effects ; Humans ; *Iatrogenic Disease/epidemiology ; Incidence ; Intestinal Perforation/*diagnosis/epidemiology/*etiology ; Prognosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Sigmoidoscopy/adverse effects

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Bowel preparation for colonoscopy remains an unpleasant experience because oral solutions have unpleasant tastes and may provoke abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and sleep disturbance. Duodenoscopic bowel preparation is an alternative method for patients who are unwilling to take oral preparation solution or for those who are supposed to have both gastroscopic and colonoscopic examination on the same day. We assessed the effectiveness and tolerance of duodenoscopic bowel preparation. METHODS: Patients in group OA (orally administered) ingested 45 mL of sodium phosphate (NaP) in the evening before the day of procedure and in the morning on the day of colonoscopy, whereas patients in group EA (endoscopically administered) were prepared for the procedure by duodenoscopic infusion of 90 mL of NaP diluted with 180 mL of water into the second portion of the duodenum. After 4 hours, we assessed the overall quality of colonic cleansing, using a range of excellent to inadequate. The patients completed a questionnaire on their preparation-associated symptoms, tolerance, and preference. RESULTS: In group EA, sleep disturbance (p<0.05) and nausea (p<0.05) occurred less frequently than in group OA. Overall, the tolerance rating for preparation was higher in group EA. However, the quality of colonic cleansing and cecum intubation time was not different between the two groups. Patients in group EA who had ingested NaP in the past preferred duodenoscopic bowel preparation. CONCLUSIONS: Duodenoscopic bowel preparation may play a role in colonic cleansing especially for patients who are scheduled to undergo gastroscopic and colonoscopic examination on the same day and for those who are unwilling to ingest NaP.
Administration, Oral ; Adult ; Aged ; Cathartics/*administration & dosage/adverse effects ; *Colonoscopy ; *Duodenoscopy ; Female ; Humans ; Image Enhancement ; Irrigation ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Phosphates/*administration & dosage/adverse effects/chemistry ; Questionnaires ; Treatment Outcome