Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial demonstrates improved procedural outcomes in post-colorectal resection patients, suggesting better techniques for endoscopy.
BACKGROUND: The use of a transparent cap is regarded as a simple method to obtain better outcomes compared with standard colonoscopy. In this study, we investigated whether cap-assisted colonoscopy can improve the quality of procedure-related outcomes in patients with a history of colorectal resection. METHODS: This study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled trial conducted at a single tertiary center by a single endoscopist (Kang J.). A total 183 patients after colorectal resection due to primary colorectal cancer were enrolled and 1:1 randomized to undergo either cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAP group) or standard colonoscopy (non-CAP group). The primary endpoint was the comparison of cecal intubation time between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The mean cecal intubation time of the CAP group (n = 89) was significantly shorter than that of the non-CAP group (n = 89) (538 seconds vs 677 seconds, P = 0.024). In the CAP group, the endoscopist performed faster intubation than average more often compared with the non-CAP group (71.9% vs 57.3%). In regard to moving average curve, the CAP group showed a gentle slope during the learning period, while the non-CAP group showed a steep decrease. CONCLUSION: The cap-assisted colonoscopy could reduce cecal intubation time and achieve more frequent faster intubation compared with standard colonoscopy in patients after colorectal resection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: