• Federico Soria, Octavio Lopez-Albors, Esther Morcillo, Carolina Martin, Ricardo Sarria, Pilar Esteban, Fernando Carballo, Enrique Perez-Cuadrado, Francisco M Sanchez, and Rafael Latorre.
• Department of Endoscopy, Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Carretera N-521, Caceres, Spain. fsoria@ccmijesususon.com
• Dig Endosc. 2013 Jan 1; 25 (1): 39-46.

AimThe aim of the present study was to assess the safety and efficacy of CO(2) during double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) in an experimental animal model study. In this study, insufflation with room air and with CO(2) was compared.MethodsTwenty healthy swines were used. The animals were randomly allocated to two groups. The room air-DBE group was insufflated with room air, whereas the CO(2)-DBE group was insufflated with CO(2). Endoscopy duration was 90 min. The following parameters were measured during the study (basal, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min): invasive hemodynamic parameters, ventilatory parameters, arterial blood gases, exploration depth, as well as biochemical tests. Residual gas was evaluated at the end of DBE, at 180 min and 24 h after DBE.ResultsDuring the endoscopic exploration none of the animals showed hemodynamic, ventilatory or arterial blood gas alterations in the normal reference range for the swine species. The CO(2) group showed statistically significant differences over the room air group with lower post-procedure residual gas and greater depth of the small bowel explored.ConclusionThe use of CO(2) for insufflation during DBE was safe and no complications associated with CO(2) were observed. In addition, the use of CO(2) offers benefits over the use of room air for insufflation during DBE.© 2012 The Authors. Digestive Endoscopy © 2012 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.

11 keywords...

hide…