RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Many studies have been done regarding perforation after colonoscopy, but few studies analyzed the risk factors of endoscopic treatment failure after colonoscopy perforation. This study aimed to analyze the clinical characteristics and treatment plan of those patients with perforation after colonoscopy diagnosis and the treatment and risk factors of failure to endoscopic treatment. METHOD: This was a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent colonoscopy examination and treatment at the Affiliated Hospital of Yangzhou University, from 04/2009 to 03/2020. The patients were grouped as perforation, treatment success, or failure (required laparoscopy or laparotomy). RESULTS: From April 2009 to March 2020, 43,470 patients were examined and treated with colonoscopy. There were 35 cases of intestinal perforation, for an incidence of 0.081%. Four patients had immediate surgical intervention (two patients with laparoscopic surgery and two with laparotomy surgery). Thirty-one (88.57%) patients underwent endoscopic treatment. Endoscopic treatment was successful in 20 patients and failed in 11. Compared with the failure group, the perforation size in the success group was smaller (7.60±4.85 vs. 14.4±7.03 mm, P=0.004), hospital stay was shorter (26.6±13.1 vs. 14.2±3.0, P=0.011), and hospitalization costs were lower (30,208±9506 vs. 23,053±6227 RMB, P=0.002). Multivariable logistic stepwise analysis showed that the absence of abdominal pain after therapeutic colonoscopy was independently associated with the success of endoscopic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic treatment is logically the preferred modality for perforation management, leading to good recovery, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs of treatment. Postoperative abdominal pain is significantly related to the failure of endoscopic treatment.
RESUMO
One hundred and forty six elderly patients with constipation undergoing colonoscopy during March 2012 and August 2013 were randomly assigned to trial and control groups.Seventy patients in trial group received Macrogol electrolytes powder combined with Chinese herb medicine Simo decoction for bowel preparation and 76 patients in control group received macrogol electrolytes powder only.The first defecation,times of defecation and tolerance of patients were compared between two groups.The quality of bowel preparation was evaluated by endoscopists with Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).The first defecation time was shorter in trial group than that in control group (55.7 ± 27.9 vs.72.9 ± 34.8,P ＜ 0.05).However,no statistical significance was found in the times of defecation and tolerance of patients between two groups.The mean BBPS score in trial groups was higher than that in control group (7.87 ± 1.08 vs.6.97 ± 0.96,P ＜ 0.05).Chinese herb medicine Simo decoction combined with conventional method shows satisfactory result for bowel preparation in elderly patients with constipation undergoing colonoscopy.
