-
J. Clin. Gastroenterol. · May 2013
Randomized Controlled TrialThe efficacy and safety of carbon dioxide insufflation during colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy in moderately sedated outpatients: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.
- Eun Hee Seo, Tae Oh Kim, Min Jae Park, Hyoung Joon Kim, Bong Chul Shin, Jae Gon Woo, Nae Yun Heo, Jongha Park, Seung Ha Park, Sung Yeon Yang, and Young Soo Moon.
- Department of Internal Medicine, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Haeundae-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea.
- J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2013 May 1;47(5):e45-9.
Goals And BackgroundColonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy (CCEGD) can be more convenient than performing each procedure individually. There has been no randomized controlled trial comparing carbon dioxide (CO2) versus air insufflations during CCEGD in sedated patients. CO2 insufflation instead of air during CCEGD may reduce abdominal pain and be more comfortable. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation during CCEGD in moderately sedated outpatients.StudyThis was a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. A total of 96 outpatients were randomly assigned to the groups of CO2 or air insufflation. Postprocedure pain was assessed using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, and the proportion of pain-free patients was compared between the groups. Waist circumferences and end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) were measured.ResultsAmong 96 patients, cecal intubation failed in 2 patients, who were excluded from the analysis. Forty-eight patients in the CO2 and 46 patients in the air group completed the study. There was significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the proportion of pain-free patients 30 minutes after the procedures [air group, 35/46 (76.1%) vs. CO2 group, 44/48 (91.6%)] (P=0.03). However, there was no significant difference in the proportion at 6 and 24 hours after the procedures. The mean increase in waist circumference was greater with air than with CO2 (1.54 vs. 0.18 cm, P<0.001). The ETCO2 measured immediately after the procedures was slightly higher in the CO2 group than in the air group (38.6 vs. 37.2 mm Hg, P=0.02), but the values were within the normal range. No significant adverse events occurred.ConclusionsCO2 insufflation during CCEGD reduced postprocedural pain and distension compared with air. It was comfortable and safe to use in moderately sedated outpatients.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.