Cargando…
Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Looping is a major problem in colonoscopy, and it prolongs procedure time. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of an external abdominal compression device (back brace support belt; Maxbelt) with respect to cecal insertion time and other outcomes. METHODS: We performed a prospect...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7273705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32514451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12276 |
_version_ | 1783542458025508864 |
---|---|
author | Toyoshima, Osamu Nishizawa, Toshihiro Sakitani, Kosuke Yamakawa, Tadahiro Yoshida, Shuntaro Fukagawa, Kazushi Hata, Keisuke Ishihara, Soichiro Suzuki, Hidekazu |
author_facet | Toyoshima, Osamu Nishizawa, Toshihiro Sakitani, Kosuke Yamakawa, Tadahiro Yoshida, Shuntaro Fukagawa, Kazushi Hata, Keisuke Ishihara, Soichiro Suzuki, Hidekazu |
author_sort | Toyoshima, Osamu |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND AIM: Looping is a major problem in colonoscopy, and it prolongs procedure time. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of an external abdominal compression device (back brace support belt; Maxbelt) with respect to cecal insertion time and other outcomes. METHODS: We performed a prospective study on outpatients undergoing elective colonoscopy in Toyoshima Endoscopy Clinic. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups and were subjected to either Maxbelt (n = 39) or no device (control, n = 38) during colonoscopy. The colonoscopist was blinded to the study. The primary outcome that was observed was insertion time. RESULTS: The intubation time of the Maxbelt group was shorter than that of the no device group, but the difference was not significant (3.29 vs 4.49 min, P = 0.069). After stratifying by age, the use of Maxbelt significantly decreased cecal intubation time in elderly participants (age ≥ 45) compared to no device group (3.27 vs 5.00 min, P = 0.032). The use of the Maxbelt significantly decreased insertion difficulty encountered by the colonoscopist (P = 0.01). There was no difference in adenoma detection rate, manual pressure, position change, and adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a back brace support belt could be a viable approach for colonoscopy in elderly patients. (University Hospital Medical Information Network: UMIN000029361). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7273705 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72737052020-06-07 Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial Toyoshima, Osamu Nishizawa, Toshihiro Sakitani, Kosuke Yamakawa, Tadahiro Yoshida, Shuntaro Fukagawa, Kazushi Hata, Keisuke Ishihara, Soichiro Suzuki, Hidekazu JGH Open Original Articles BACKGROUND AND AIM: Looping is a major problem in colonoscopy, and it prolongs procedure time. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of an external abdominal compression device (back brace support belt; Maxbelt) with respect to cecal insertion time and other outcomes. METHODS: We performed a prospective study on outpatients undergoing elective colonoscopy in Toyoshima Endoscopy Clinic. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups and were subjected to either Maxbelt (n = 39) or no device (control, n = 38) during colonoscopy. The colonoscopist was blinded to the study. The primary outcome that was observed was insertion time. RESULTS: The intubation time of the Maxbelt group was shorter than that of the no device group, but the difference was not significant (3.29 vs 4.49 min, P = 0.069). After stratifying by age, the use of Maxbelt significantly decreased cecal intubation time in elderly participants (age ≥ 45) compared to no device group (3.27 vs 5.00 min, P = 0.032). The use of the Maxbelt significantly decreased insertion difficulty encountered by the colonoscopist (P = 0.01). There was no difference in adenoma detection rate, manual pressure, position change, and adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a back brace support belt could be a viable approach for colonoscopy in elderly patients. (University Hospital Medical Information Network: UMIN000029361). Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 2019-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7273705/ /pubmed/32514451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12276 Text en © 2019 The Authors. JGH Open: An open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Toyoshima, Osamu Nishizawa, Toshihiro Sakitani, Kosuke Yamakawa, Tadahiro Yoshida, Shuntaro Fukagawa, Kazushi Hata, Keisuke Ishihara, Soichiro Suzuki, Hidekazu Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title | Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title_full | Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title_fullStr | Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title_short | Colonoscopy using back brace support belt: A randomized, prospective trial |
title_sort | colonoscopy using back brace support belt: a randomized, prospective trial |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7273705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32514451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12276 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT toyoshimaosamu colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT nishizawatoshihiro colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT sakitanikosuke colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT yamakawatadahiro colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT yoshidashuntaro colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT fukagawakazushi colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT hatakeisuke colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT ishiharasoichiro colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial AT suzukihidekazu colonoscopyusingbackbracesupportbeltarandomizedprospectivetrial |