Impact of carbon dioxide insufflation and water exchange on postcolonoscopy outcomes in patients receiving on-demand sedation: a randomized controlled trial
- PMID: 27207825
- DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.05.021
Impact of carbon dioxide insufflation and water exchange on postcolonoscopy outcomes in patients receiving on-demand sedation: a randomized controlled trial
Abstract
Background and aims: Water exchange (WE) is the least painful insertion method during colonoscopy. Its impact on postcolonoscopy discomfort has not been well-described. Carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation consistently reduced postcolonoscopy discomfort. We compared postcolonoscopy outcomes of various combinations of insertion and withdrawal techniques (insertion-withdrawal modality): WE-CO2, WE-air insufflation (WE-AI), and CO2-CO2.
Methods: A total of 240 patients undergoing on-demand sedation diagnostic colonoscopy were randomized to WE-CO2 (n = 79), WE-AI (n = 80), CO2-CO2 (n = 81), with postprocedural data collected up to 24 hours. The primary outcome was postcolonoscopy bloating. Other postcolonoscopy outcomes included pain scores, flatus and incontinence episodes, toilet use, interference with normal activities, patient satisfaction, and patient willingness to repeat the procedure.
Results: Demographic and procedural data were comparable. Compared with WE-AI, WE-CO2 and CO2-CO2 resulted in significantly less bloating (all P < .0005) and lower pain scores (P values ranged from .008 to < .0005) up to 3 hours and fewer flatus episodes up to 6 hours (P values ranged from .003 to < .0005). WE-CO2 resulted in less interference with same-day activities compared with WE-AI (P = .043). The differences in postprocedural outcomes were significant, but the magnitude was small. Patient satisfaction and willingness to repeat the procedure were high and comparable among groups. WE was the least painful insertion technique (P < .0005).
Conclusions: The combination WE-CO2 appears to be the optimal choice to decrease pain during the examination and to reduce bloating and other undesired procedural outcomes afterward. If a CO2 insufflator is already available, it seems advisable to adopt the combination WE-CO2. In the absence of a CO2 insufflator, the cost effectiveness of the addition of withdrawal CO2 to WE in diagnostic and nondiagnostic settings needs to be critically assessed. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02409979.).
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Water-aided insertion and CO2-assisted withdrawal: Do we still need routine sedation for colonoscopy?Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jan;85(1):219-220. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.07.021. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017. PMID: 27986112 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical