4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Impact of prior abdominal or pelvic surgery on colonoscopy outcomes

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 711-716

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00004836-200609000-00010

关键词

colonoscopy; insertion time; completion; a surgical history

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Goals: This large prospective study attempted to analyze the effect of various prior surgery on colonoscopy performance. Background: It is generally presumed that colonoscopy in patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery is difficult. This difficulty is apparently due to adhesions and anatomic alterations after surgery but the incidence, site, and severity of adhesions are different according to the types of surgery. Study: We analyzed completion rate and insertion time in 4089 consecutive colonoscopies in patients with intact colon. Results: The adjusted completion rate for colonoscopy was 96.7%. The mean insertion time was 6.2 +/- 4.0 minutes. Not only old age [odds ratio (OR) 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.04, 2.04]] and inadequate bowel cleansing (OR 5.82; 95% CT [4.19, 8.09]) but also a surgical history (OR 1.71; 95% CI [1.18, 2.48]) were independent factors associated with procedural incompleteness. Of surgical history, gastrectomy and hysterectomy were significantly associated with procedural incompleteness (P < 0.00 1 and P = 0.001, respectively). Old age (OR 1.48; 95% CI [1.22, 1.79]), female sex (OR 1.22; 95% CI [1.01, 1.48]), constipation as an indication (OR 1.58; 95% Cl [1.24, 2.02)), and inadequate bowel cleansing (OR 1.46; 95% CI [1.13, 1.88]) were independent factors associated with prolonged insertion time ( > 10 min), but a surgical history lost statistical power as a predictor for prolonged insertion time in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Although the difference in insertion time was not substantial, a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery is associated with difficulty in colonoscopy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据