Clin Endosc.  2012 Sep;45(3):278-281.

How Do I Overcome Difficulties in Insertion?

• Jung Y
• Lee SH

Abstract

Demand for colonoscopy is increasing because it is an important tool not only for screening of colorectal neoplasm but also for resection of such lesions in early stage. Cecal intubation requires expertise on shortening of the examination time and improvement of the cecal intubation rate without causing pain to the patients. About 5% to 10% of patients still experience difficulties or failure of the cecal intubation. There are number of factors that affect the difficulty of the colonoscopy such as technical skill of the endoscopist, angulated sigmoid, redundant colon, advanced age, female gender, diverticular disease, and inadequate bowel preparation. In an effort to overcome these situations and to and aiding colonoscope insertion with reducing pain, various methods have introduced. Like this review discusses ways to approach patients with technically difficult colons for achieving the successful cecal intubation.

Keyword

Colonoscopy; Gastrointestinal intubation; Difficulty

MeSH Terms

Colon
Colon, Sigmoid
Colonoscopes
Colonoscopy
Colorectal Neoplasms
Female
Humans
Intubation
Intubation, Gastrointestinal
Mass Screening

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Approach strategy in the difficult colon.

Reference

1. Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002; 97:1296–1308. PMID: 12094842.

2. Rathgaber SW, Wick TM. Colonoscopy completion and complication rates in a community gastroenterology practice. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 64:556–562. PMID: 16996349.

3. Lee SH, Chung IK, Kim SJ, et al. An adequate level of training for technical competence in screening and diagnostic colonoscopy: a prospective multicenter evaluation of the learning curve. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008; 67:683–689. PMID: 18279862.

4. Chung JI, Kim N, Um MS, et al. Learning curves for colonoscopy: a prospective evaluation of gastroenterology fellows at a single center. Gut Liver. 2010; 4:31–35. PMID: 20479910.

5. Bernstein C, Thorn M, Monsees K, Spell R, O'Connor JB. A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61:72–75. PMID: 15672059.

6. Kim WH, Cho YJ, Park JY, Min PK, Kang JK, Park IS. Factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 52:600–605. PMID: 11060182.

7. Anderson JC, Messina CR, Cohn W, et al. Factors predictive of difficult colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 54:558–562. PMID: 11677470.

8. Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C, Swarbrick E, Williams CB, Epstein O. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow? Gut. 2004; 53:277–283. PMID: 14724164.

9. Church JM. Complete colonoscopy: how often? And if not, why not? Am J Gastroenterol. 1994; 89:556–560. PMID: 8147359.

10. Cirocco WC, Rusin LC. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995; 38:964–968. PMID: 7656745.

11. Rex DK, Goodwine BW. Method of colonoscopy in 42 consecutive patients presenting after prior incomplete colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002; 97:1148–1151. PMID: 12014719.

12. Bat L, Williams CB. Usefulness of pediatric colonoscopes in adult colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1989; 35:329–332. PMID: 2767386.

13. Marshall JB, Perez RA, Madsen RW. Usefulness of a pediatric colonoscope for routine colonoscopy in women who have undergone hysterectomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 55:838–841. PMID: 12024137.

14. Morini S, Zullo A, Hassan C, Lorenzetti R, Campo SM. Endoscopic management of failed colonoscopy in clinical practice: to change endoscopist, instrument, or both? Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011; 26:103–108. PMID: 20686778.

15. Pasha SF, Harrison ME, Das A, Corrado CM, Arnell KN, Leighton JA. Utility of double-balloon colonoscopy for completion of colon examination after incomplete colonoscopy with conventional colonoscope. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 65:848–853. PMID: 17324408.

16. Leung CW, Kaltenbach T, Soetikno R, Wu KK, Leung FW, Friedland S. Water immersion versus standard colonoscopy insertion technique: randomized trial shows promise for minimal sedation. Endoscopy. 2010; 42:557–563. PMID: 20593332.

17. Leung FW, Leung JW, Mann SK, Friedland S, Ramirez FC, Olafsson S. DDW 2011 cutting edge colonoscopy techniques-state of the art lecture master class-warm water infusion/CO(2) insufflation for colonoscopy. J Interv Gastroenterol. 2011; 1:78–82. PMID: 21776430.

18. Uraoka T, Kato J, Kuriyama M, et al. CO2 insufflation for potentially difficult colonoscopies: efficacy when used by less experienced colonoscopists. World J Gastroenterol. 2009; 15:5186–5192. PMID: 19891018.

19. Kondo S, Yamaji Y, Watabe H, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the usefulness of a transparent hood attached to the tip of the colonoscope. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102:75–81. PMID: 17100978.

20. Harada Y, Hirasawa D, Fujita N, et al. Impact of a transparent hood on the performance of total colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 69(3 Pt 2):637–644. PMID: 19251004.

21. Raju GS, Rex DK, Kozarek RA, Ahmed I, Brining D, Pasricha PJ. A novel shape-locking guide for prevention of sigmoid looping during colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59:416–419. PMID: 14997146.

22. Rothstein R. Novel overtube device for the performance of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 51:AB280.