PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy

IntroductionDouble balloon endoscopy is considered a technique for the investigation of the small-bowel. Recently, Double balloon colonoscopy (DBC) using dedicated colonoscopes has been shown to be associated with very high rates of caecal intubation. In this study we report the DBC experience in ou...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gut 2012-07, Vol.61 (Suppl 2), p.A161-A161
Hauptverfasser: Alexandridis, E G, Koulaouzidis, A, Trimble, K, Plevris, J N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page A161
container_issue Suppl 2
container_start_page A161
container_title Gut
container_volume 61
creator Alexandridis, E G
Koulaouzidis, A
Trimble, K
Plevris, J N
description IntroductionDouble balloon endoscopy is considered a technique for the investigation of the small-bowel. Recently, Double balloon colonoscopy (DBC) using dedicated colonoscopes has been shown to be associated with very high rates of caecal intubation. In this study we report the DBC experience in our centre as second line endoscopic investigation in patients who failed conventional colonoscopy.MethodsRetrospective review of patients referred for DBC to our Centre from July 2009 to January 2012.ResultsTwenty-three consecutive patients (12 male/11 female mean age 60.2±16 years) underwent DBC. The sedation used was midazolam/fentanyl (mean: 3.5/75 mg). 19/23 had a DBC due to previously failed colonoscopies. In four, DBC was first choice test as they had unpleasant experiences from conventional colonoscopy in the past. In 7/23 (30.4%), there was evidence of previous abdominal surgery. In 4/23 (17.4%) a fixed and/or acutely angulated sigmoid was the cause of failure. In the remaining 12 patients, significant patient discomfort was the principal cause of failure. Nine patients (39.1%) had one failed colonoscopy, six (26.1%) had two failed colonoscopies, while four (17.4%) had more than two failed colonoscopies. In 22/23 DBC (95.7%) was successful; the entire colon and terminal ileum DBC were examined in all cases. No immediate or delayed complications were recorded. Patient tolerability was very good.ConclusionDBC is a safe and reliable method for complete colon examination and it is an important alternative technique in cases where a conventional colonoscopy has failed. Patient groups that are more likely to benefit are those with adhesions due abdominal surgery or fixed and angulated sigmoid colon. The technique is currently limited to few centers only, but the success rate and the very good patient tolerability suggest that it should be considered as an alternative in challenging cases.Competing interestsE. Alexandridis Grant/Research Support from: Fujifilm, Imotech, A. Koulaouzidis: None Declared, K. Trimble: None Declared, J. Plevris Grant/Research Support from: Fujinon, Imotech.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302514b.214
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2038745305</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2038745305</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b2604-ea6de42aadaba3f96c6b361329f66b31fec29975efe3ad17bea0fecf5266e6023</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwDVhibfAjsRN2UN4CihAgdpaTTiAljYOdQLtjw4_yJRilQixZzWjm3BnpILTN6C5jQu49de20rginjBNBecyibJezaAUNWCQTIniSrKIBpUyRWEXpOtrwfkopTZKUDdDs5mpMAv718Xlku6wCnJmqsrbGua1sbX1um8U-9mX9FHY51K0DDPMGXAl1DriscWPa0Lcev5ftM24cvJW289UCF6asYPL30CZaK0zlYWtZh-j-5PhudEYux6fno4NLknFJIwJGTiDixkxMZkSRylxmQjLB00KGjhWQ8zRVMRQgzISpDAwNsyLmUoKkXAzRTn-3cfa1A9_qqe1cHV5qTkWioljQOFCqp3JnvXdQ6MaVM-MWmlH941b3bvWPW710q4OskCR9svQtzH9jxr1oqYSK9fXDSN9GF4_8UF1pGXje89ls-u8n3xAakR4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2038745305</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy</title><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Alexandridis, E G ; Koulaouzidis, A ; Trimble, K ; Plevris, J N</creator><creatorcontrib>Alexandridis, E G ; Koulaouzidis, A ; Trimble, K ; Plevris, J N</creatorcontrib><description>IntroductionDouble balloon endoscopy is considered a technique for the investigation of the small-bowel. Recently, Double balloon colonoscopy (DBC) using dedicated colonoscopes has been shown to be associated with very high rates of caecal intubation. In this study we report the DBC experience in our centre as second line endoscopic investigation in patients who failed conventional colonoscopy.MethodsRetrospective review of patients referred for DBC to our Centre from July 2009 to January 2012.ResultsTwenty-three consecutive patients (12 male/11 female mean age 60.2±16 years) underwent DBC. The sedation used was midazolam/fentanyl (mean: 3.5/75 mg). 19/23 had a DBC due to previously failed colonoscopies. In four, DBC was first choice test as they had unpleasant experiences from conventional colonoscopy in the past. In 7/23 (30.4%), there was evidence of previous abdominal surgery. In 4/23 (17.4%) a fixed and/or acutely angulated sigmoid was the cause of failure. In the remaining 12 patients, significant patient discomfort was the principal cause of failure. Nine patients (39.1%) had one failed colonoscopy, six (26.1%) had two failed colonoscopies, while four (17.4%) had more than two failed colonoscopies. In 22/23 DBC (95.7%) was successful; the entire colon and terminal ileum DBC were examined in all cases. No immediate or delayed complications were recorded. Patient tolerability was very good.ConclusionDBC is a safe and reliable method for complete colon examination and it is an important alternative technique in cases where a conventional colonoscopy has failed. Patient groups that are more likely to benefit are those with adhesions due abdominal surgery or fixed and angulated sigmoid colon. The technique is currently limited to few centers only, but the success rate and the very good patient tolerability suggest that it should be considered as an alternative in challenging cases.Competing interestsE. Alexandridis Grant/Research Support from: Fujifilm, Imotech, A. Koulaouzidis: None Declared, K. Trimble: None Declared, J. Plevris Grant/Research Support from: Fujinon, Imotech.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0017-5749</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-3288</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302514b.214</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</publisher><subject>Abdominal surgery ; Balloon treatment ; Colon ; Colonoscopy ; Endoscopy ; Fentanyl ; Ileum ; Intubation ; Midazolam ; Patients ; Small intestine ; Surgery</subject><ispartof>Gut, 2012-07, Vol.61 (Suppl 2), p.A161-A161</ispartof><rights>2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>Copyright: 2012 © 2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b2604-ea6de42aadaba3f96c6b361329f66b31fec29975efe3ad17bea0fecf5266e6023</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://gut.bmj.com/content/61/Suppl_2/A161.2.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://gut.bmj.com/content/61/Suppl_2/A161.2.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3182,23551,27903,27904,77347,77378</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alexandridis, E G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koulaouzidis, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trimble, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plevris, J N</creatorcontrib><title>PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy</title><title>Gut</title><addtitle>Gut</addtitle><description>IntroductionDouble balloon endoscopy is considered a technique for the investigation of the small-bowel. Recently, Double balloon colonoscopy (DBC) using dedicated colonoscopes has been shown to be associated with very high rates of caecal intubation. In this study we report the DBC experience in our centre as second line endoscopic investigation in patients who failed conventional colonoscopy.MethodsRetrospective review of patients referred for DBC to our Centre from July 2009 to January 2012.ResultsTwenty-three consecutive patients (12 male/11 female mean age 60.2±16 years) underwent DBC. The sedation used was midazolam/fentanyl (mean: 3.5/75 mg). 19/23 had a DBC due to previously failed colonoscopies. In four, DBC was first choice test as they had unpleasant experiences from conventional colonoscopy in the past. In 7/23 (30.4%), there was evidence of previous abdominal surgery. In 4/23 (17.4%) a fixed and/or acutely angulated sigmoid was the cause of failure. In the remaining 12 patients, significant patient discomfort was the principal cause of failure. Nine patients (39.1%) had one failed colonoscopy, six (26.1%) had two failed colonoscopies, while four (17.4%) had more than two failed colonoscopies. In 22/23 DBC (95.7%) was successful; the entire colon and terminal ileum DBC were examined in all cases. No immediate or delayed complications were recorded. Patient tolerability was very good.ConclusionDBC is a safe and reliable method for complete colon examination and it is an important alternative technique in cases where a conventional colonoscopy has failed. Patient groups that are more likely to benefit are those with adhesions due abdominal surgery or fixed and angulated sigmoid colon. The technique is currently limited to few centers only, but the success rate and the very good patient tolerability suggest that it should be considered as an alternative in challenging cases.Competing interestsE. Alexandridis Grant/Research Support from: Fujifilm, Imotech, A. Koulaouzidis: None Declared, K. Trimble: None Declared, J. Plevris Grant/Research Support from: Fujinon, Imotech.</description><subject>Abdominal surgery</subject><subject>Balloon treatment</subject><subject>Colon</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Fentanyl</subject><subject>Ileum</subject><subject>Intubation</subject><subject>Midazolam</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Small intestine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><issn>0017-5749</issn><issn>1468-3288</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwDVhibfAjsRN2UN4CihAgdpaTTiAljYOdQLtjw4_yJRilQixZzWjm3BnpILTN6C5jQu49de20rginjBNBecyibJezaAUNWCQTIniSrKIBpUyRWEXpOtrwfkopTZKUDdDs5mpMAv718Xlku6wCnJmqsrbGua1sbX1um8U-9mX9FHY51K0DDPMGXAl1DriscWPa0Lcev5ftM24cvJW289UCF6asYPL30CZaK0zlYWtZh-j-5PhudEYux6fno4NLknFJIwJGTiDixkxMZkSRylxmQjLB00KGjhWQ8zRVMRQgzISpDAwNsyLmUoKkXAzRTn-3cfa1A9_qqe1cHV5qTkWioljQOFCqp3JnvXdQ6MaVM-MWmlH941b3bvWPW710q4OskCR9svQtzH9jxr1oqYSK9fXDSN9GF4_8UF1pGXje89ls-u8n3xAakR4</recordid><startdate>201207</startdate><enddate>201207</enddate><creator>Alexandridis, E G</creator><creator>Koulaouzidis, A</creator><creator>Trimble, K</creator><creator>Plevris, J N</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201207</creationdate><title>PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy</title><author>Alexandridis, E G ; Koulaouzidis, A ; Trimble, K ; Plevris, J N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b2604-ea6de42aadaba3f96c6b361329f66b31fec29975efe3ad17bea0fecf5266e6023</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Abdominal surgery</topic><topic>Balloon treatment</topic><topic>Colon</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Fentanyl</topic><topic>Ileum</topic><topic>Intubation</topic><topic>Midazolam</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Small intestine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alexandridis, E G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koulaouzidis, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trimble, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plevris, J N</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Gut</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alexandridis, E G</au><au>Koulaouzidis, A</au><au>Trimble, K</au><au>Plevris, J N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy</atitle><jtitle>Gut</jtitle><addtitle>Gut</addtitle><date>2012-07</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>Suppl 2</issue><spage>A161</spage><epage>A161</epage><pages>A161-A161</pages><issn>0017-5749</issn><eissn>1468-3288</eissn><abstract>IntroductionDouble balloon endoscopy is considered a technique for the investigation of the small-bowel. Recently, Double balloon colonoscopy (DBC) using dedicated colonoscopes has been shown to be associated with very high rates of caecal intubation. In this study we report the DBC experience in our centre as second line endoscopic investigation in patients who failed conventional colonoscopy.MethodsRetrospective review of patients referred for DBC to our Centre from July 2009 to January 2012.ResultsTwenty-three consecutive patients (12 male/11 female mean age 60.2±16 years) underwent DBC. The sedation used was midazolam/fentanyl (mean: 3.5/75 mg). 19/23 had a DBC due to previously failed colonoscopies. In four, DBC was first choice test as they had unpleasant experiences from conventional colonoscopy in the past. In 7/23 (30.4%), there was evidence of previous abdominal surgery. In 4/23 (17.4%) a fixed and/or acutely angulated sigmoid was the cause of failure. In the remaining 12 patients, significant patient discomfort was the principal cause of failure. Nine patients (39.1%) had one failed colonoscopy, six (26.1%) had two failed colonoscopies, while four (17.4%) had more than two failed colonoscopies. In 22/23 DBC (95.7%) was successful; the entire colon and terminal ileum DBC were examined in all cases. No immediate or delayed complications were recorded. Patient tolerability was very good.ConclusionDBC is a safe and reliable method for complete colon examination and it is an important alternative technique in cases where a conventional colonoscopy has failed. Patient groups that are more likely to benefit are those with adhesions due abdominal surgery or fixed and angulated sigmoid colon. The technique is currently limited to few centers only, but the success rate and the very good patient tolerability suggest that it should be considered as an alternative in challenging cases.Competing interestsE. Alexandridis Grant/Research Support from: Fujifilm, Imotech, A. Koulaouzidis: None Declared, K. Trimble: None Declared, J. Plevris Grant/Research Support from: Fujinon, Imotech.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</pub><doi>10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302514b.214</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0017-5749
ispartof Gut, 2012-07, Vol.61 (Suppl 2), p.A161-A161
issn 0017-5749
1468-3288
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2038745305
source BMJ Journals - NESLi2; PubMed Central
subjects Abdominal surgery
Balloon treatment
Colon
Colonoscopy
Endoscopy
Fentanyl
Ileum
Intubation
Midazolam
Patients
Small intestine
Surgery
title PMO-214 Double balloon colonoscopy: single centre experience in patients with previously failed colonoscopy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T12%3A13%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=PMO-214%E2%80%85Double%20balloon%20colonoscopy:%20single%20centre%20experience%20in%20patients%20with%20previously%20failed%20colonoscopy&rft.jtitle=Gut&rft.au=Alexandridis,%20E%20G&rft.date=2012-07&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=Suppl%202&rft.spage=A161&rft.epage=A161&rft.pages=A161-A161&rft.issn=0017-5749&rft.eissn=1468-3288&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302514b.214&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2038745305%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2038745305&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true