Use of robotic colonoscopy in patients with previous incomplete colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: Conventional colonoscopy (CC) is the gold standard to diagnostic and therapeutic approach to colon. However, in few cases, cecal intubation could fail due to colon anatomy, patient compliance and physician expertise. Endotics robotic colonoscopy is a novel, safe, mini-invasive modality to explore the entire colon. Our aim was to assess, in a retrospective study, Endotics ability of cecal intubation in all cases in which CC failed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2012, 276 Endotics robotic colonscopy examinations were performed at the Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases Unit of Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy, in a series of consecutive patients who had undergone CC and failed cecal intubation. RESULTS: We assessed the cecal intubation rate in 102 patients addressed to Endotics after previous incomplete CC. Overall, endotics system was successful in 93.1% of the incomplete conventional colonoscopy cases (95% performance). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever the intended exploration of the entire colon with CC failed, the endotics robotic endoscopy represented a useful tool as it helped examine the entire colon in almost all cases.

Colonic disease in cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension: an endoscopic and clinical evaluation.

Fifty cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension but without colonic or systemic disease underwent lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in order to investigate the effects, if any, of portal hypertension on the colon. Fifty patients without liver or systemic disease, examined by colonoscopy because of irritable bowel syndrome in the same period served as controls. Rectosigmoid varices were observed in 34% of the cirrhotic patients and 2% of the controls. Hemorrhoids were observed in 70% of the cirrhotic patients and 48% of the controls. Multiple vascular-appearing lesions were found in 16% of the cirrhotic patients and 6% of the controls. Nonspecific inflammatory changes were noted in 10% of the cirrhotic patients and 4% of the controls. Simultaneous presence, in the same patient, of rectosigmoid varices, hemorrhoids, multiple vascular-appearing lesions, and nonspecific inflammatory changes, was observed in only five (10%) of the cirrhotic patients. We found polyps in 12% of the cirrhotic patients and 14% of the controls, and a malignant tumor in 4% of the cirrhotic patients. The patients with normal colonoscopic findings were 8% of the cirrhotic patients and 36% of the controls. All patients and controls were followed up for 1 year; there was no gastrointestinal hemorrhage among controls, whereas 34% of the cirrhotic patients had an upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (88% from esophageal varices, 12% from the stomach) and 4% had a lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage (one from rectosigmoid varices and one from nonspecific inflammatory lesions). Colonic lesions were significantly more frequent in the cirrhotic patients (92%) than in the control group (64%); however, such lesions did not seem specific to the disease and were not statistically correlated with the degree of esophageal varices by Child's grading, the etiology of cirrhosis, or the bleeding risk from the lower gastrointestinal tract.

Double pylorus: report of two cases and review of the literature.

Double pylorus is a rare condition consisting of a double communication between gastric antrum and duodenal bulb; in most cases it is a complication of penetrating ulcer, sometimes it is a congenital abnormality. The prevalence of this rare anomaly ranges from 0.02% to 0.13%; the male:female ratio is about 2:1. Two cases of acquired double pylorus are reported with a review of the literature. The first case represented an occasional report; in the other one the development of double pylorus from confluent prepiloric and bulbar ulcers was documented through serial endoscopies. Both patients were affected with chronic renal failure and referred previous treatment with diclofenac; however, their relationship with double pylorus onset remains unproven.