Brocchi Emilio, Pezzilli Raffaele, Tomassetti Paola, Campana Davide, Morselli-Labate Antonio M, Corinaldesi Roberto
Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Mar;103(3):581-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01693.x. Epub 2007 Dec 12.
Completion rates, pain, and difficulties during the exam are still problems in colonoscopy. New methods of lubrication, rarely considered a matter of study, may help in this respect. Our aim was to compare an oil-assisted technique with a modified warm water method applied during colonoscopy.
A prospective, randomized, and controlled study was planned in which three groups of patients were submitted to colonoscopy: a standard lubricating method (water-soluble jelly: group A, 170 patients) was adopted in a control group, whereas the standard method plus injection into the colon of corn seed oil (group B, 170 patients) or warm water (group C, 170 patients) were employed in the other groups. The main variables evaluated were: the success rate for total intubation, the time required to reach the cecum and the time needed to examine the colon at withdrawal, and the level of pain and degree of difficulty associated with the examination.
Successful intubation to the cecum was significantly more frequent (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively) in the oil group (group B, 155/166) and in the warm water group (group C, 156/163) than in the control group (group A, 138/164), and less time was needed (P < 0.001); no significant difference was found between group B and C. Furthermore, no significant differences were found with regard to time for examination at withdrawal among the three groups. Level of pain and degree of difficulty during colonoscopy were significantly lower in the oil (P < 0.001) and in the warm water (P < 0.001) groups than in the control group, but no significant difference was found between group B and C. Neither side effects were observed for patients nor damage to the instrument.
Warm water and oil-assisted colonoscopy could be simple, safe, and inexpensive methods for easier and less painful examinations.
结肠镜检查时的完成率、疼痛及检查过程中的困难仍是问题。润滑的新方法在这方面可能有所帮助,但很少被视为研究课题。我们的目的是比较结肠镜检查过程中油辅助技术与改良温水法。
计划进行一项前瞻性、随机对照研究,将三组患者进行结肠镜检查:对照组采用标准润滑方法(水溶性凝胶:A组,170例患者),而其他组采用标准方法加向结肠内注入玉米油(B组,170例患者)或温水(C组,170例患者)。评估的主要变量包括:全插管成功率、到达盲肠所需时间和退镜时检查结肠所需时间,以及与检查相关的疼痛程度和困难程度。
油组(B组,155/166)和温水组(C组,156/163)成功插入盲肠的频率显著高于对照组(A组,138/164)(分别为P < 0.01和P < 0.001),且所需时间更短(P < 0.001);B组和C组之间未发现显著差异。此外,三组在退镜检查时间方面未发现显著差异。结肠镜检查期间的疼痛程度和困难程度在油组(P < 0.001)和温水组(P < 0.001)中显著低于对照组,但B组和C组之间未发现显著差异。患者未观察到副作用,仪器也未受损。
温水和油辅助结肠镜检查可能是简单、安全且廉价的方法,可使检查更容易且疼痛更少。