论文部分内容阅读
AIM: To determine variations in colonoscopy real-time insertion pain among investigators using three different insertion techniques.METHODS: From March 2013 through June 2014, 18-85-year-old diagnostic and 50-70-year-old screening patients were enrolled at each center to on-demand sedation colonoscopy with water exchange(WE), water immersion(WI) and insufflation with air or CO2 for insertion and withdrawal [air or carbon dioxide(AICD)]. Data were aggregated for analysis. Primary outcome: Variations in real-time maximum insertion pain(0 = none, 1-2 = discomfort, 10 = worst).RESULTS: One thousand and ninety-one cases analyzed: WE(n = 371); WI(n = 338); AICD(n = 382). Demographics and indications were comparable. The WE group had the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score, mean(95%CI): WE 2.8(2.6-3.0), WI 3.8(3.5-4.1) and AICD 4.4(4.1-4.7), P < 0.0005. Ninety percent of the colonoscopists were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. One investigator had high insertion pain in all groups, nonetheless WE achieved the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score. WE had the highest proportions of patients with painless unsedated colonoscopy(vs WI, P = 0.013; vs AICD, P < 0.0005); unsedated colonoscopy with only minor discomfort(vs AICD, P < 0.0005), and completion without sedation(vs AICD, P < 0.0005).CONCLUSION: Aggregate data confirm superiority of WE in lowering colonoscopy real-time maximum insertion pain and need for sedation. Ninety percent of investigators were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. Our results suggest that the technique deserves consideration in a broader scale.
AIM: To determine variations in colonoscopy real-time insertion pain among investigators using three different insertion techniques. METHODS: From March 2013 through June 2014, 18-85-year-old diagnostic and 50-70-year-old screening patients were enrolled at Each center to on-demand sedation with water exchange (WE), water immersion (WI) and insufflation with air or CO2 for insertion and withdrawal [air or carbon dioxide (AICD)]. Data were aggregated for analysis. Primary outcome: Variations in real-time maximum insertion pain (0 = none, 1-2 = discomfort, 10 = worst) .RESULTS: One thousand and ninety-one cases analyzed: WE (n = 371); WI The WE group had the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score, mean (95% CI): WE 2.8 (2.6-3.0), WI 3.8 (3.5-4.1) and AICD 4.4 (4.1-4.7), P <0.0005. Ninety percent of the colonoscopists were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. One i nvestigator had high insertion pain in all groups, nonetheless WE achieved the lowest real-time maximum insertion pain score. WE had the highest proportions of patients with painless unsedated colonoscopy (vs WI, P = 0.013; vs AICD, P <0.0005); unsedated colonoscopy with only minor discomfort (vs AICD, P <0.0005), and completion without sedation (vs AICD, P <0.0005) .CONCLUSION: Aggregate data confirm superiority of WE in lowering colonoscopy real-time maximum insertion pain and need for sedation. Ninety percent of investigators were able to use water exchange to significantly decrease maximum insertion pain scores. Our results suggest that the technique deserves consideration in a broader scale.