Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Scand J Gastroenterol ; 56(12): 1480-1489, 2021 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34534048

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Women are at high risk for painful colonoscopy. Pain, but also sedation, are barriers to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In a randomised controlled trial, we compared on-demand with pre-colonoscopy opioid administration to control pain in women at CRC screening age. METHODS: Women, aged 55-79 years, attending colonoscopy at two Norwegian endoscopy units were randomised 1:1:1 to (1) fentanyl on-demand, (2) fentanyl prior to colonoscopy, or (3) alfentanil on-demand. The primary endpoint was procedural pain reported by the patients on a validated four-point Likert scale and further dichotomized for the study into painful (moderate or severe pain) and non-painful (slight or no pain) colonoscopy. Secondary endpoints were: willingness to repeat colonoscopy, adverse events, cecal intubation time and rate, and post-procedure recovery time. RESULTS: Between June 2017 and May 2020, 183 patients were included in intention-to-treat analyses in the fentanyl on-demand group, 177 in the fentanyl prior to colonoscopy group, and 179 in the alfentanil on-demand group. Fewer women receiving fentanyl prior to colonoscopy reported a painful colonoscopy compared to those who were given fentanyl on-demand (25.2% vs. 44.1%, p < .001). There was no difference in the proportion of painful colonoscopies between fentanyl on-demand and alfentanil on-demand (44.1% vs. 39.5%, p = .40). No differences were observed for adverse events or any of the other secondary endpoints between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fentanyl prior to colonoscopy provided better pain control than fentanyl or alfentanil on-demand. Fentanyl before colonoscopy should be recommended to all women at screening age. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01538550). Norwegian Medicines Agency (16/16266-13). EU Clinical Trials Register (EUDRACTNR. 2016-005090-13).


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides , Ciego , Anciano , Alfentanilo/efectos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Colonoscopía/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor/etiología , Dolor/prevención & control
2.
NEJM Evid ; 1(6): EVIDoa2200003, 2022 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38319238

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence using computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) in real time with images acquired during colonoscopy may help colonoscopists distinguish between neoplastic polyps requiring removal and nonneoplastic polyps not requiring removal. In this study, we tested whether CADx analyzed images helped in this decision-making process. METHODS: We performed a multicenter clinical study comparing a novel CADx-system that uses real-time ultra-magnifying polyp visualization during colonoscopy with standard visual inspection of small (≤5 mm in diameter) polyps in the sigmoid colon and the rectum for optical diagnosis of neoplastic histology. After committing to a diagnosis (i.e., neoplastic, uncertain, or nonneoplastic), all imaged polyps were removed. The primary end point was sensitivity for neoplastic polyps by CADx and visual inspection, compared with histopathology. Secondary end points were specificity and colonoscopist confidence level in unaided optical diagnosis. RESULTS: We assessed 1289 individuals for eligibility at colonoscopy centers in Norway, the United Kingdom, and Japan. We detected 892 eligible polyps in 518 patients and included them in analyses: 359 were neoplastic and 533 were nonneoplastic. Sensitivity for the diagnosis of neoplastic polyps with standard visual inspection was 88.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.3 to 91.5) compared with 90.4% (95% CI, 86.8 to 93.1) with CADx (P=0.33). Specificity was 83.1% (95% CI, 79.2 to 86.4) with standard visual inspection and 85.9% (95% CI, 82.3 to 88.8) with CADx. The proportion of polyp assessment with high confidence was 74.2% (95% CI, 70.9 to 77.3) with standard visual inspection versus 92.6% (95% CI, 90.6 to 94.3) with CADx. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time polyp assessment with CADx did not significantly increase the diagnostic sensitivity of neoplastic polyps during a colonoscopy compared with optical evaluation without CADx. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway [Norges Forskningsråd], the Norwegian Cancer Society [Kreftforeningen], and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; UMIN number, UMIN000035213.)

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA