Extended flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by colonoscopists for colorectal cancer screening: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Caecal intubation can be achieved by extended flexible sigmoidoscopy in 32% of patients. AIM: To assess the feasibility of extended flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by colonoscopists for colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: We enrolled 41 patients referred for screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. After purging, examination was performed with a colonoscope. All patients completed sigmoidoscopy (success in meeting referral goal); 93% and 71% had examination to the transverse or ascending colon, and caecum, respectively. Overall yield and right-sided polyps was 56% and 27%, respectively. Caecal intubation and complete examination with polypectomy took 6.0 +/- 2.5 and 18.3 +/- 5.1 min, respectively; with no complications. Twelve patients requested colonoscope withdrawal because of discomfort. Although 46% reported moderate to severe discomfort, 39% and 36%, respectively, were definitely or probably willing to repeat flexible sigmoidoscopy. RESULTS: Unsedated colonoscopy introduced as extended flexible sigmoidoscopy emphasizes the benefits of added yield rather than the negative image of withholding of discomfort relief. The patient can choose to accept the equivalent of an unsedated colonoscopy or reject the option based on perceived discomfort during extended flexible sigmoidoscopy performed by the colonoscopist. CONCLUSION: Extended flexible sigmoidoscopy is a feasible option in carefully selected patients, fully prepared and by an experienced colonoscopist.

A randomized controlled trial of total colonic decompression after colonoscopy to improve patient comfort.

OBJECTIVES: Bloating occurring after colonoscopy may cause significant discomfort in some patients. We sought to determine whether total colonic decompression decreased bloating and improved comfort after colonoscopy. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized to total colonic decompression or to the control group after completion of the routine colonoscopy. The colonoscope was advanced again to the cecum and the air aspirated during withdrawal in patients randomized to decompression and the procedure was terminated without decompression in control patients. Pain and bloating was assessed in the recovery room and in 24-48 h using a five-point scale. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were randomized to decompression and 61 were randomized to the control group. The baseline demographic and procedural characteristics were similar between the two groups, but decompression took significantly longer (median, 17 min vs 14 min, p = 0.0002). Seventy-five percent of the decompression group and 80% of the control group denied any pain during colonoscopy. Significantly fewer patients from the decompression group complained of bloating after the procedure (25% vs 59%, p < 0.001) when questioned in the recovery room. However, comparable patients complained of postprocedure bloating when questioned in 24-48 h after the procedure (45% of decompression group vs 47% of control group, p = 0.86). The nurse and the endoscopist were poor at predicting the patient's bloating and significantly overestimated the level of pain. CONCLUSIONS: Total colonic decompression does not significantly reduce bloating after colonoscopy when assessed 24-48 h after the procedure.

Endoscopy-based triage significantly reduces hospitalization rates and costs of treating upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding have a benign outcome and could receive less intensive and costly care if accurately identified. We sought to determine whether early endoscopy performed shortly after admission in the emergency department could significantly reduce the health care use and costs of caring for patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding without adversely affecting the clinical outcome. METHODS: All eligible patients with upper GI bleeding and stable vital signs were randomized after admission to undergo endoscopy in 1 to 2 days (control) or early endoscopy in the emergency department. Patients with low-risk findings on early endoscopy were discharged directly from the emergency department. Clinical outcomes and costs were prospectively assessed for 30 days. RESULTS: We randomized 110 consecutive stable patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding during the 12-month study period. The baseline demographic features, endoscopic findings, and the clinical outcomes were no different between the two groups. However the findings of the early endoscopy allowed us to immediately discharge 26 of 56 (46%) patients randomized to that group. No patient discharged from the emergency department suffered an adverse outcome. The hospital stay (median of 1 day [interquartile range of 0 to 3 days] vs. 2 days [interquartile range of 2 to 3 days], p = 0.0001) and the cost of care ($2068 [interquartile range of $928 to $3960] versus $3662 [interquartile range of $2473 to $7280], p = 0.00006) were significantly less for the early endoscopy group. CONCLUSIONS: Early endoscopy performed shortly after admission in the emergency department safely triaged 46% of patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding to outpatient care, which significantly reduced hospital stay and costs.