Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2017; 05(07): E683-E689
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-107779
Original article
Eigentümer und Copyright ©Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017

Use of warm carbon dioxide insufflators does not affect intra-colonic gas temperature and has no effect on polyp detection rate during colonoscopy – a randomized controlled trial

Akash M. Patel
Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario
,
Jordan Green
Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario
,
Fahd Jowhari
Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario
,
Lawrence Hookey
Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 14 October 2016

accepted after revision 02 March 2017

Publication Date:
06 July 2017 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Methods to improve polyp detection during colonoscopy have been investigated, with conflicting results for warm water irrigation. Carbon Dioxide (CO2) warmed to 37 °C may have similar or more pronounced effects on bowel motility. This study aimed to assess whether warmed CO2 would improve polyp detection compared to room temperature air insufflation.

Patients and methods This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial that enrolled 204 patients undergoing screening or surveillance outpatient colonoscopy. The primary outcome was polyp per patient detection rate. Secondary outcomes included adenoma per patient detection rates, bowel spasm, and patient comfort.

Results The trial was terminated after an interim analysis determined futility. Between the warmed CO2 and room air groups, no significant differences were found in the per-colonoscopy polyp detection rate (P = 0.57); overall polyp detection rate (P = 0.69); or adenoma detection rates (P = 0.74). More patients in the room temperature group had lower spasm scores (p = 0.02); however, there was a trend towards greater patient comfort in the warmed CO2 group (P = 0.054). An ex-vivo study showed a significant difference between exiting CO2 temperature at the insufflator end vs. delivered CO2 temperature at the colonoscope tip end. The temperature of insufflation at the tip of the colonoscope was not different when using warmed vs. unwarmed insufflation (P = 0.62).

Conclusion When compared with room air insufflation, warmed CO2 insufflation did not affect polyp detection rates.

 

  • References

  • 1 Bray F, Ren JS, Masuyer E. et al. Global estimates of cancer prevalence for 27 sites in the adult population in 2008. Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 1133-1145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 The state of US health, 1990-2010: burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors. JAMA 2013; 310: 591-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O'Brien MJ. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Shaukat A, Mongin SJ, Geisser MS. et al. Long-term mortality after screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1106-1114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Heresbach D, Barrioz T, Lapalus MG. et al. Miss rate for colorectal neoplastic polyps: a prospective multicenter study of back-to-back video colonoscopies. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 284-290
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J. et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 343-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Pohl H, Robertson DJ. Colorectal cancers detected after colonoscopy frequently result from missed lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8: 858-864
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lebwohl B, Kastrinos F, Glick M. et al. The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 1207-1214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kushnir VM, Oh YS, Hollander T. et al. Impact of retroflexion vs. second forward view examination of the right colon on adenoma detection: a comparison study. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 415-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Chandran S, Parker F, Vaughan R. et al. Right-sided adenoma detection with retroflexion versus forward-view colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 608-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS. et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lee CK, Cha JM, Kim WJ. Endoscopist Fatigue May Contribute to a Decline in the Effectiveness of Screening Colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol 2015; 49: e51-56
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lee TJ, Blanks RG, Rees CJ. et al. Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 20-26
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Siersema PD, Rastogi A, Leufkens AM. et al. Retrograde-viewing device improves adenoma detection rate in colonoscopies for surveillance and diagnostic workup. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 3400-3408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gralnek IM. Emerging technological advancements in colonoscopy: Third Eye(R) Retroscope(R) and Third Eye(R) Panoramic(TM) , Fuse(R) Full Spectrum Endoscopy(R) colonoscopy platform, Extra-Wide-Angle-View colonoscope, and NaviAid(TM) G-EYE(TM) balloon colonoscope. Dig Endosc 2015; 27: 223-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Rabenstein T, Radaelli F, Zolk O. Warm water infusion colonoscopy: a review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 940-951
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jun WU, Bing HU. Comparative effectiveness of water infusion vs air insufflation in colonoscopy: a meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15: 404-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Cadoni S, Falt P, Sanna S. et al. Impact of Colonoscopy Insertion Techniques on Adenoma Detection. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61: 2068-2075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rondonotti E, Radaelli F, Paggi S. et al. Hyoscine N-butylbromide for adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Dig Liver Dis 2013; 45: 663-668
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Corte C, Dahlenburg L, Selby W. et al. Hyoscine butylbromide administered at the cecum increases polyp detection: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 917-922
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 de Brouwer EJ, Arbouw ME, van der Zwet WC. et al. Hyoscine N-butylbromide does not improve polyp detection during colonoscopy: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 835-840
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Wu J, Hu B. The role of carbon dioxide insufflation in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 128-136
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Amato A, Radaelli F, Paggi S. et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation or warm-water infusion versus standard air insufflation for unsedated colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2013; 56: 511-518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cheng Y, Xiong XZ, Wu SJ. et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A meta-analysis and systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 5622-5631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Yamano HO, Yoshikawa K, Kimura T. et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation for colonoscopy: evaluation of gas volume, abdominal pain, examination time and transcutaneous partial CO2 pressure. J Gastroenterol 2010; 45: 1235-1240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Rostom A, Ross ED, Dube C. et al. Development and validation of a nurse-assessed patient comfort score for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 255-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mui LM, Ng EK, Chan KC. et al. Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of intravenously administered hyoscine N-butyl bromide in patients undergoing colonoscopy with patient-controlled sedation. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 22-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 143: 844-857
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Read TE, Read JD, Butterly LF. Importance of adenomas 5 mm or less in diameter that are detected by sigmoidoscopy. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 8-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Aronchick CLW, Wright S, Dufrayne F. et al. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing. Am J gastro 1999; 94: 2667
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Cadoni S, Falt P, Gallittu P. et al. Water Exchange Is the Least Painful Colonoscope Insertion Technique and Increases Completion of Unsedated Colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 1972-1980e1-3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Xu X, Zhu H, Chen D. et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation or warm-water infusion for unsedated colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial in patients with chronic constipation in China. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 18-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar