Limited low-air insufflation is optimal for colonoscopy

Comparison of rectal suction versus rectal tube insertion for reducing abdominal symptoms immediately after unsedated colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Abdominal discomfort and bloating are common symptoms after colonoscopy. We aimed to compare the effects of direct rectal suction with insertion of a rectal tube on reducing abdominal symptoms after unsedated colonoscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized to have direct rectal suction or placement of a rectal tube immediately after colonoscopy. Post-procedure abdominal pain and bloating were measured with a 0 - 100 visual analogue scale. All participants ranked their satisfaction with either direct rectal suction or insertion of a rectal tube.

RESULTS

Abdominal pain and bloating were significantly reduced by direct rectal suction and placement of a rectal tube at 1 minute (both P < 0.05) and 3 minutes (both P < 0.05) after the colonoscopy. Direct rectal suction significantly reduced abdominal pain at 1 minute (P = 0.001) and 3 minutes (P = 0.005) after colonoscopy compared with rectal tube insertion. Bloating was significantly lower in patients with direct rectal suction compared to those with rectal tube insertion at 1 minute (P = 0.03) after colonoscopy. Greater satisfaction was found in patients with direct rectal suction compared to those with rectal tube insertion (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Direct rectal suction is more effective than rectal tube placement in reducing abdominal symptoms immediately after colonoscopy. Our study suggests that direct rectal suction is useful in providing relief of symptoms when patients are having difficulty expelling air or are experiencing abdominal symptoms following colonoscopy.

Transparent-cap-fitted colonoscopy shows higher performance with cecal intubation time in difficult cases

AIM: To investigate the efficacy of cap-fitted colonoscopy (CFC) with regard to cecal intubation time.

METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-five patients undergoing screening colonoscopy at Gospel Hospital, Kosin University College of Medicine were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial between January and December 2010. Colonoscopies were conducted by a single endoscopist. Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, history of abdominal surgery, quality of preparation, and the presence of diverticulosis were recorded.

RESULTS: One hundred and fifty patients were allocated into a CFC group and 145 into a non-CFC (NCF) group. Cecal intubations were achieved in all patients. Cecal intubation time in the CFC group was significantly shorter than in the NCF group for specific conditions: age ≥ 60 years, prior abdominal surgery, and poor bowel preparation. The number of detected adenomas was higher in the CFC group than in the NCF group (P = 0.040).

CONCLUSION: CFC facilitated shortening of the cecal intubation time in difficult cases, and was more sensitive for detecting adenomas than was NCF.