Suppr超能文献

二氧化碳注入和水交换对按需镇静患者结肠镜检查后结局的影响:一项随机对照试验。

Impact of carbon dioxide insufflation and water exchange on postcolonoscopy outcomes in patients receiving on-demand sedation: a randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Digestive Endoscopy Unit, St. Barbara Hospital, Iglesias, Italy.

Digestive Diseases Center, Vitkovice Hospital, Ostrava, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jan;85(1):210-218.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.05.021. Epub 2016 May 17.

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 (CO) insufflation consistently reduced postcolonoscopy discomfort. We compared postcolonoscopy outcomes of various combinations of insertion and withdrawal techniques (insertion-withdrawal modality): WE-CO, WE-air insufflation (WE-AI), and CO-CO.

METHODS

A total of 240 patients undergoing on-demand sedation diagnostic colonoscopy were randomized to WE-CO (n = 79), WE-AI (n = 80), CO-CO (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-CO and CO-CO 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-CO 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-CO appears to be the optimal choice to decrease pain during the examination and to reduce bloating and other undesired procedural outcomes afterward. If a CO insufflator is already available, it seems advisable to adopt the combination WE-CO. In the absence of a CO insufflator, the cost effectiveness of the addition of withdrawal CO to WE in diagnostic and nondiagnostic settings needs to be critically assessed. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02409979.).

摘要

背景和目的

水交换(WE)是结肠镜检查中最不痛的插入方法。其对结肠镜检查后不适的影响尚未得到很好的描述。二氧化碳(CO)充气一致减少了结肠镜检查后的不适。我们比较了不同插入和拔出技术组合(插入-拔出方式)的结肠镜检查后结果:WE-CO、WE-空气充气(WE-AI)和 CO-CO。

方法

总共 240 名接受按需镇静诊断性结肠镜检查的患者被随机分为 WE-CO(n = 79)、WE-AI(n = 80)和 CO-CO(n = 81),收集术后数据长达 24 小时。主要结果是结肠镜检查后腹胀。其他结肠镜检查后结果包括疼痛评分、放气和失禁发作、使用厕所、正常活动干扰、患者满意度和患者愿意重复该程序。

结果

人口统计学和程序数据相似。与 WE-AI 相比,WE-CO 和 CO-CO 导致显著较少的腹胀(均 P <.0005)和较低的疼痛评分(P 值范围从.008 到 <.0005)至 3 小时和较少的放气发作至 6 小时(P 值范围从.003 到 <.0005)。与 WE-AI 相比,WE-CO 对当天活动的干扰较小(P =.043)。术后结果的差异显著,但幅度较小。患者满意度和愿意重复该程序在各组之间较高且相似。WE 是最不痛的插入技术(P <.0005)。

结论

WE-CO 的组合似乎是减少检查期间疼痛和减少腹胀和其他不良程序结果的最佳选择。如果已经有 CO 充气机,采用 WE-CO 组合似乎是明智的。如果没有 CO 充气机,则需要批判性地评估在诊断和非诊断环境中向 WE 添加 CO 撤回的成本效益。(临床试验注册号:NCT02409979。)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验