A randomized comparison of ultrathin and standard colonoscope in cecal intubation rate and patient tolerance

Comparison of the characteristics of the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI colonoscopes in non-sedated patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The purpose of this randomized controlled study was to compare the characteristics of the CF-H290I (high-definition) colonoscope with those of the PCF-Q260JI (high-resolution) colonoscope in non-sedated patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery in an effort to help endoscopists to select more effectively and objectively between the various colonoscopes.

METHODS

A total of 397 patients who underwent colonoscopy at the Affiliated Wuxi People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, between August 2022 and October 2022 were randomized to a CF-H290I group (n = 198) or a PCF-Q260JI group (n = 199) using a computer-generated allocation method. We compared the adenoma detection rate (ADR), patient satisfaction with the examination, discomfort associated with colonoscopy including abdominal distension and pain, cecal intubation time, and patient willingness to undergo colonoscopy in the future between the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI groups.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the overall ADR between the CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI groups (81 [40.9%] vs 63 [31.7%], Z = 3.674, P = 0.055). However, the ADRs in the transverse colon and left colon were significantly higher in the CF-H290I group (22 [11.1%] vs 6 [3.0%], Z = 9.588, P = 0.002 and 57 [28.8%] vs 37 [18.6%], Z = 5.212, P = 0.017, respectively). More sessile serrated lesions were detected in the CF-H290I group (52 [26.3] vs 30 [15.1%], Z = 7.579, P = 0.006). Patient satisfaction with colonoscopy was better in the PCF-Q260JI group (8.91 ± 1.09 vs 8.51 ± 1.44, t = -3.158, P < 0.01) with less likelihood of discomfort (23 [11.6%] vs 41 [20.7%], Z = 6.144, P = 0.013), The number of patients willing to undergo colonoscopy in the future was significantly greater in the PCF-Q260JI group (168 [84.4%] vs 149 [75.3%], Z = 5.186, P = 0.023). The cecal intubation time was significantly shorter in the CF-H290I group (256.09 ± 155.70 s vs 315.64 ± 171.64 s, P = 0.004). There were no complications such as perforation or bleeding in either group.

CONCLUSION

The CF-H290I and PCF-Q260JI colonoscopes each have advantages when used in patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery. The CF-H290I has higher ADRs in the transverse and left colon whereas the PCF-Q260JI is less painful and better accepted by patients. This study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Wuxi People's Hospital and was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200063092).

Randomised controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy: a scoping review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy may be effective at mitigating negative experiences and perceptions of the procedure, but research to characterise the extent and features of studies of these interventions is limited.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review searching multiple databases for peer-reviewed publications of randomised controlled trials conducted in adults investigating a non-pharmacological intervention to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy. Study characteristics were tabulated and summarised narratively and graphically.

RESULTS

We screened 5939 citations and 962 full texts, and included 245 publications from 39 countries published between 1992 and 2022. Of these, 80.8% were full publications and 19.2% were abstracts. Of the 41.9% of studies reporting funding sources, 11.4% were unfunded. The most common interventions were carbon dioxide and/or water insufflation methods (33.9%), complementary and alternative medicines (eg, acupuncture) (20.0%), and colonoscope technology (eg, magnetic scope guide) (21.6%). Pain was as an outcome across 82.0% of studies. Studies most often used a patient-reported outcome examining patient experience during the procedure (60.0%), but 42.9% of studies included an outcome without specifying the time that the patient experienced the outcome. Most intraprocedural patient-reported outcomes were measured retrospectively rather than contemporaneously, although studies varied in terms of when outcomes were assessed.

CONCLUSION

Research on non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy is unevenly distributed across types of intervention and features high variation in study design and reporting, in particular around outcomes. Future research efforts into non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy should be directed at underinvestigated interventions and developing consensus-based guidelines for study design, with particular attention to how and when outcomes are experienced and measured.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

42020173906.

Negative effect of prolonged cecal intubation time on adenoma detection in female patients

Background and Aim

Withdrawal time of the colonoscope is associated with adenoma detection. However, the association between cecal intubation time and adenoma detection remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between cecal intubation time and adenoma detection.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed prospectively collected data from a randomized controlled trial on female patients who underwent colonoscopy in an academic hospital. The primary outcome was the mean number of all adenomas detected per patient. Secondary outcomes included the mean number of advanced, diminutive, small/large, right-sided colonic, and left-sided colonic adenomas detected per patient. Furthermore, the detection rates of all categories of adenoma were evaluated.

Results

The analysis included 216 female patients aged ≥20 years. The correlation analysis did not reveal a significant relationship (P = 0.473) between cecal intubation and withdrawal times. The mean number of all adenomas detected per patient declined by approximately 30% (1.05-0.70) from the fastest to the slowest insertion time quartile. Adjusted regression analysis showed a significant decrease in the mean number of all adenomas detected per patient with increased intubation time (relative risk, RR = 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.99, P = 0.045), whereas the mean number of other categories of adenomas detected per patient and the detection rates of all categories of adenoma were not associated with the cecal intubation time.

Conclusions

This study showed a significant association between prolonged cecal intubation time and decreased adenoma detection. The cecal intubation time may be a significant quality indicator for colonoscopy.

Efficacy of Novel Ultrathin Single-Balloon Enteroscopy for Crohn's Disease: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Background/Aims

The evaluation of small bowel lesions of Crohn's disease (CD) using balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) is crucial because mucosal healing is associated with a good prognosis. However, BAE procedures are invasive, requiring sedation or analgesia to reduce the patient's pain. This study evaluated the clinical usefulness of a novel ultrathin single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) procedure for CD.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 102 CD patients who underwent trans-anal SBE between January 2012 and May 2018. Of these patients, 82 underwent enteroscopy using conventional SBE, while 20 underwent ultrathin SBE. Patients were analyzed using propensity score matching, with 20 patients per group. The median duration of the examination, terminal ileum intubation rate, median cecum intubation time, median insertion depth, adverse events, and sedated dose in each group were compared.

Results

Before propensity score matching, the conventional SBE group had a larger number of surgical history patients than the ultrathin SBE group (p=0.05). After matching, the two groups did not significantly differ clinically. There were no significant differences in the mean duration of the examination, cecum intubation time, or terminal ileal intubation rate between ultrathin SBE and conventional SBE. The mean insertion depth of ultrathin SBE tended to be deeper than that of conventional SBE (p=0.09). The use of ultrathin SBE also reduced the sedative dose during needed for enteroscopy compared with conventional SBE (p=0.005).

Conclusions

Novel ultrathin SBE may be less painful for CD patients than conventional SBE.

Efficacy of a small-caliber colonoscope for pain in female patients during unsedated colonoscopy: a randomized controlled study

Background and study aims  Female sex has been identified as a factor increasing patients' pain during colonoscopy. The aim of this randomized controlled study was to investigate the efficacy of a small-caliber colonoscope, PCF-PQ260 L, for limiting pain in women during unsedated colonoscopy. Patients and methods  Women who underwent unsedated colonoscopy were randomly allocated to either the small-caliber or standard colonoscope group. The primary outcome was overall pain and secondary outcomes were maximum pain and procedural measures. In addition, the effects of colonoscope type were analysed using analysis of covariance and logistic regression with adjustment for stratification factors, age and prior abdomino-pelvic surgery. Results  A total of 220 women were randomly assigned to the small-caliber (n = 110) or standard (n = 110) colonoscope groups. Overall and maximum pain scores were significantly lower in the small-caliber colonoscope group than the standard colonoscope group (overall pain, 20.0 vs. 32.4, P < 0.0001; maximum pain, 28.9 vs. 47.2, P < 0.0001). The small-caliber colonoscope group achieved a superior cecal intubation rate (99 % vs. 93 %, P = 0.035). The rate of patient acceptance of unsedated colonoscopy in the future was higher in the small-caliber colonoscope group than in the standard colonoscope group (98 % vs. 87 %, P = 0.003). In addition, the small-caliber colonoscope was superior with respect to reducing pain and improving the rate of patient acceptance of unsedated colonoscopy with adjustment. Conclusions  This study demonstrates the efficacy of the small-caliber colonoscope for reducing pain in women and improving their rate of acceptance of unsedated colonoscopy.

Ultrathin colonoscopy can improve complete preoperative colonoscopy for stenotic colorectal cancer: Prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

Preoperative colonoscopy is often incomplete for stenotic colorectal cancers (CRC). This prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the ability of an ultrathin colonoscope (UTC) to inspect the whole colon by passing through the stenotic CRC.

METHODS

All patients who underwent preoperative colonoscopy for stenotic CRCs at Shizuoka Cancer Center were examined for eligibility. If a standard colonoscope (PCF-H290ZI) could not pass because of a stenosis, the patients were recruited. All of the eligible patients were prospectively enrolled when informed consent could be obtained, and complete colonoscopy was attempted again using an UTC (PCF-PQ260L). Patients with stent placement and those requiring right hemicolectomy were not recruited. Primary endpoints were pass-through and cecal intubation rates. The detected synchronous neoplasias (adenomas and cancers) and their pathological findings after resection were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were enrolled between September 2017 and February 2019. The mean age was 65.6 ± 10.8 years, and 59% were male. The pass-through and cecal intubation rates were 67% (67/100) and 58% (58/100), respectively. Synchronous lesions located proximal to the stenoses were detected in 65.5% (38/58) of the complete colonoscopies, with a total of 86 lesions, including 18 advanced neoplasias with three invasive cancers.

CONCLUSION

When standard colonoscopy cannot pass through stenotic CRC, ultrathin colonoscopy can be considered as an option to inspect the whole colon proximal to the stenosis because treatment strategy can potentially be changed by detecting synchronous neoplasias proximal to the stenosis before surgery. (UMIN000028505).

Initial Experience of a Community Gastroenterology Practice with Ultraslim Colonoscopy

Colonoscopies are performed for cancer screening as well as for other diagnostic and therapeutic reasons. It is considered successful if cecal intubation is achieved and adequate mucosa is visualized. It is not always possible to achieve cecal intubation due to multiple reasons such as sharp angulation or fixed segments of the colon and stricture. A pediatric colonoscope (PDC) and an ultrathin colonoscope (UTC) are used as a tool to negotiate sharp angulation and the fixed segments of the colon because their small diameter allows easy movement. An ultrathin colonoscope is used at many practices as a rescue in situations where standard colonoscopes have failed. Our study highlights the use of an ultraslim scope in both rescue situations and as the initial colonoscope of choice in an ambulatory endoscopy center.

Variability in cecal intubation rate by calculation method: a call for standardization of key performance indicators in endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The cecal intubation rate (CIR) is a widely accepted key performance indicator (KPI) in colonoscopy but lacks a universal calculation method. We aimed to assess whether differences in CIR calculation methods could have an impact on perceived trainee outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of CIR calculation methods was conducted on major societal guidelines (United Kingdom, European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [ESGE] and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy [ASGE]) and trainee-inclusive studies. Trainees awarded colonoscopy certification between June 2011 and 2016 were identified from the United Kingdom e-portfolio and selected as a validation cohort. For each trainee, both the crude and unassisted CIR were calculated for 50 post-certification procedures using definitions from the 3 international guidelines. The resulting CIRs, and the proportions of endoscopists failing to meet the minimum standard of CIR ≥90%, were then compared across these definitions.

RESULTS

Across the 3 guidelines and 37 eligible studies identified, differences in CIR calculation methodology were demonstrated. These related to adjustment criteria (18 studies) and whether unassisted CIR was stipulated (18 studies). In the validation cohort of 733 trainees (36,650 procedures), the median crude CIR ranged from 96% (ESGE) to 98% (ASGE) (P < .001) and whether unassisted CIR was specified (ESGE, 94%; ASGE, 96%; P < .001). The proportion of trainees failing to achieve CIR ≥90% varied significantly across the different definitions, from 4.9% for the crude ASGE definition to 18.6% for the unassisted ESGE definition (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

CIR calculation methods vary among guidelines and research studies; this has an impact on trainee performance measures. With CIR used as an example, this study highlights the need for standardized definitions and calculations of KPIs in endoscopy.

Quality measures improving endoscopic screening of colorectal cancer: a review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major health-care problem all over the world and CRC screening is effective in reducing mortality and increasing the 5-year survival. Colonoscopy has a central role in CRC screening. It can be performed as a primary test, as a recall policy after a positive result of another screening test, and for surveillance. Since effectiveness of endoscopic screening depends on adequate detection and removal of colonic polyps, consistent quality measures, which are useful in enhancing the diagnostic yield of examination, are essential. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to analyze current evidence from literature supporting quality measures able to refine endoscopic screening of colorectal cancer. Expert commentary: Quality measures namely a) time slot allotted to colonoscopy, b) assessment of indication, c) bowel preparation, d) Cecal intubation, e) withdrawal time, f) adenoma detection rate, g) proper management of lesions (polypectomy technique, polyps retrieval rate and tattooing of resection sites), and h) adequate follow-up intervals play a key role in identifying malignant and at-risk lesions and improving the outcome of screening. Adherence to these quality measures is critical to maximize the effectiveness of CRC screening, as well as, a proper technique of colonoscopy and a quality report of the procedure. Among all recommended measures, adenoma detection rate is the most important and must be kept above the recommended quality threshold by all physicians practicing in the setting of screening.

Numerical evaluation of the efficacy of small-caliber colonoscopes in reducing patient pain during a colonoscopy

Patient pain caused by a colonoscope is one of the main complications in completing a colonoscopy. Currently, randomized controlled trial (RCT) is one of the most used methods to evaluate the efficacy of small-caliber (SC) colonoscopes in reducing patient pain during a colonoscopy, compared with a standard colonoscope (SDC). However, many disturbing factors, including endoscopists' skills, characteristics of patients and new technical features of the colonoscope (passive bending and high force transmission shaft), limit the reliability and generalizability of each finding in current RCTs. This paper focuses on modeling the insertion of colonoscopes within colon models using an explicit finite element method (FEM). Such a numerical model could overcome the limitations in RCTs. At the same time, it is expected to evaluate the efficacy of the small-caliber colonoscopes in reducing patient pain during a colonoscopy, while considering the effects of patient characteristics, including age, region and gender. The simulation results in this work showed that: compared with the SDC, a SC colonoscope may be more helpful in reducing discomfort for older patients, patients with smaller colon diameters and females.

A prospective randomized study of the use of an ultrathin colonoscope versus a pediatric colonoscope in sedation-optional colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Ultrathin colonoscopes (UTC) reportedly produce less pain during colonoscopy than standard colonoscopes. The aim of this study was to assess the tolerability of an UTC compared with that of a pediatric colonoscope.

METHODS

A total of 270 adult patients scheduled to undergo colonoscopy were randomized, with 134 allocated to the UTC group and 136 to the pediatric colonoscope group. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale. For all procedures, sedation was administered only if requested. Overall pain, rate and time of cecal and terminal ileum intubation, number of patients requesting sedation, adenoma detection rates (ADR), and rate of complications were measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

Among all patients, the medians of maximum pain and overall pain were significantly lower in the UTC group than in the pediatric colonoscope group (23 vs. 38, P < 0.001; 12 vs. 22, P = 0.0003, respectively). Significantly fewer patients requested sedation in the UTC group than in the pediatric colonoscope group (1.4 vs. 6.6%; P = 0.0269). No significant differences were seen in either the rate and time of successful cecal and terminal ileum intubation, or in other procedure-related outcomes, including ADR.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with a pediatric colonoscope, the UTC was associated with reduced overall and maximum pain during colonoscopy, with no difference in ADR.

Ultrathin versus pediatric instruments for colonoscopy in older female patients: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Small-caliber endoscopes such as gastroscopes or pediatric colonoscopes are occasionally required to negotiate fixed or angulated colons. However, the use of a new ultrathin instrument (diameter 7.0 mm) narrower than other conventional colonoscopes has not been evaluated. The aim of the present study was to compare the use compare the use of an ultrathin colonoscope (UTC) with a pediatric colonoscope (PDC) for colonoscopy in older female patients.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted in a single academic endoscopy unit. A total of 77 female patients aged ≥70 years undergoing unsedated colonoscopy were randomized to colonoscopy with a UTC (n = 39) or PDC (n = 38). Primary outcome measurement was the degree of pain using a numerical rating scale, and secondary outcomes were cecal intubation rate, ileal intubation rate, time to cecum and adenoma detection rate.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in reported pain using the numerical rating scale (median, UTC 1 vs PDC 4, P < 0.0001). Cecal intubation rates were 97.4% in UTC and 92.1% in PDC (P = 0.36), and ileal intubation rates were 82.0% and 89.4% (P = 0.76), respectively. However, median times to cecum were significantly longer using UTC compared with PDC (15.2 min vs 11.1 min, P = 0.022). Adenoma detection rates were 30.7% in UTC and 26.3% in PDC (P = 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy using UTC was almost equivalent to that of PDC in older female patients, with significantly less pain compared with PDC. UTC may be an alternative to PDC for the difficult colon.

What Can We Do to Optimize Colonoscopy and How Effective Can We Be?

In the USA, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and third leading cause of cancer death among both men and women. Declining rates of colon cancer in the past decade have been attributed in part to screening and removal of precancerous polyps via colonoscopy. Recent emphasis has been placed on measures to increase the quality and effectiveness of colonoscopy. These have been divided into pre-procedure quality metrics (bowel preparation), procedural quality metrics (cecal intubation, withdrawal time, and adenoma detection rate), post-procedure metrics (surveillance interval), and other quality metrics (patient satisfaction and willingness to repeat the procedure). The purpose of this article is to review the data and controversies surrounding each of these and identify ways to optimize the performance of colonoscopy.

Clinical impact of ultrathin colonoscopy for Crohn's disease patients with strictures

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Mucosal healing is now the ideal treatment goal for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and endoscopy is suitable for both visualizing the intestinal mucosa and optimizing treatment according to the objective endoscopic findings; however, passing through strictures with a conventional colonoscope is sometimes difficult. An ultrathin colonoscope (outer diameter 9.2 mm) has been developed for superior insertion performance.

METHODS

CD patients with strictures that could not be passed with a conventional colonoscope were eligible for entry into the study. We investigated the rate of passage of the ultrathin colonoscope beyond strictures. We also investigated the clinical impact of optimizing the treatment strategy according to the endoscopic findings beyond the stricture.

RESULTS

Of 49 patients, the ultrathin colonoscope could pass the stricture in 59.2% (29/49). The main reason for failure compared with the "pass" group was anal stricture (P = 0.005). When including finger bougie for severe anal stricture, passage of the stricture was achieved in 83.7% (41/49) of cases and the oral mucosa beyond the stricture was visualized. In these cases, 56.1% (23/41) had treatment efficacy confirmed and 43.9% (18/41) required a change of treatment. Importantly, half (9/18) of them were in clinical remission. There were no complications of the study.

CONCLUSION

The ultrathin colonoscope could provide optimized treatment based on objective findings of the activity of the oral-side mucosa in CD patients complicated with stricture. Selection of the appropriate endoscope to visualize the responsible lesion is essential to optimize the treatment strategy in each case of CD.

Evaluation of discomfort during colonoscopy with conventional and ultrathin colonoscopes in ulcerative colitis patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), colonoscopy is an essential procedure for evaluating mucosal damage, and treatment outcomes. A new flexible ultrathin colonoscope (PCF-PQ260) has been developed to readily pass through tortuous and narrow lesions of the colon and cause minimum patient discomfort. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the comfort and performance of this new type of scope in UC patients who underwent colonoscopy for estimation of mucosal inflammation, basically without sedation.

METHODS

In a prospective, single-center setting, among 107 UC patients who were to undergo colonoscopy, 84 eligible cases were randomly assigned to the new ultrathin flexible colonoscope, PCF-PQ260 (n = 42) or to a conventional colonoscope, PCF-Q260A (n = 42). Main outcome measure was patient pain level determined by visual analogue scale (VAS) with 0 = none, and 100 = extremely painful. Other outcomes were cecal intubation time, rate of complete intubation (to reach the cecum) and rate of procedural complications.

RESULTS

VAS score was significantly lower in the new-scope group as compared with the conventional-scope group: mean ± SD, median (range): 19.3 ± 16.9, 14 (0-62) vs 32.0 ± 21.6, 31.8 (0-100, P = 0.005). However, cecal intubation rate (97.6%) and time (4 min) were similar in the two groups. There was no procedure-related serious complication in either group.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicated that the flexible ultrathin colonoscope PCF-PQ260 has significantly better tolerability in UC patients compared to a conventional colonoscope.

Colonoscopy using a small-caliber colonoscope with passive-bending after incomplete colonoscopy due to sharp angulation or pain

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the performance of a newly developed small-caliber (SC) colonoscope (PCF-PQ260L). This colonoscope (diameter 9.2 mm) is designed with passive-bending and high-force transmission. The SC colonoscope was used for rescue colonoscopy following incomplete colonoscopy with a standard (SD) colonoscope caused by sharp angulation, loop formation, or pain.

METHODS

Records of SC colonoscopy given to patients following an incomplete colonoscopy with the SD colonoscope and in the same session were analyzed. Cecal intubation rate, pain using a visual analog scale (0 = none, 100 = extremely painful) in the first and second colonoscopy, total time, new lesions detected with the SC colonoscopy, dosage of sedation used, and any complications were assessed. Examinations that could not be completed, because the colonoscope was not long enough to reach the cecum due to a redundant colon were excluded.

RESULTS

The records of 43 patients who were given SC colonoscopy following incomplete examinations using the SD colonoscope were reviewed. In 97.7 % of cases (42/43), cecal intubation was achieved with the SC colonoscope in the same session. The mean pain score during colonoscopy was significantly lower for the second SC colonoscopy than for the first SD colonoscopy (40.6 ± 14.1 vs. 74.5 ± 10.8, P < 0.001). Lesions were detected with the SC colonoscope in 41.8 % of cases (18/43).

CONCLUSIONS

When a colonoscopy with SD colonoscope failed due to sharp angulations, loop formation, or pain, subsequent colonoscopy with a SC colonoscope increased cecal intubation and lesion detection rates and decreased severity of reported pain.