Eun Hee Seo

The Effectiveness of Short Message Service to Assure the Preparation-to-Colonoscopy Interval before Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy

Background/Aims. The preparation-to-colonoscopy (PC) interval is one of several important factors for the bowel preparation. Short message service (SMS) reminder from a cellular phone has been suggested to improve compliance in various medical situations. We evaluated the effectiveness of SMS reminders to assure the PC interval for colonoscopy. Methodology. This prospective randomized study was investigator blinded. In the No-SMS group, patients took the first 2 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) between 6 and 8 PM on the day before colonoscopy and the second 2 L PEG approximately 6 hours before the colonoscopy without SMS. In the SMS group, patients took first 2 L PEG in the same manner as the No-SMS group and the second 2 L PEG after receiving an SMS 6 hours before the colonoscopy. Results. The SMS group had a lower score than the No-SMS group, according to the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that compliance with diet instructions (odds ratio (OR) 2.109; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11–3.99, P = 0.022) and intervention using SMS ((OR) 2.329; 95% (CI), 1.34–4.02, P = 0.002) were the independent significant factors for satisfactory bowel preparation. Conclusions. An SMS reminder to assure PC interval improved the bowel preparation quality for colonoscopy with bowel preparation.

The efficacy and safety of carbon dioxide insufflation during colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy in moderately sedated outpatients: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

Goals and Background: Colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy (CCEGD) can be more convenient than performing each procedure individually. There has been no randomized controlled trial comparing carbon dioxide (CO2) versus air insufflations during CCEGD in sedated patients. CO2 insufflation instead of air during CCEGD may reduce abdominal pain and be more comfortable. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation during CCEGD in moderately sedated outpatients. Study: This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. A total of 96 outpatients were randomly assigned to the groups of CO2 or air insufflation. Postprocedure pain was assessed using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, and the proportion of pain-free patients was compared between the groups. Waist circumferences and end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) were measured. Results: Among 96 patients, cecal intubation failed in 2 patients, who were excluded from the analysis. Forty-eight patients in the CO2 and 46 patients in the air group completed the study. There was significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the proportion of pain-free patients 30 minutes after the procedures [air group, 35/46 (76.1%) vs. CO2 group, 44/48 (91.6%)] (P=0.03). However, there was no significant difference in the proportion at 6 and 24 hours after the procedures. The mean increase in waist circumference was greater with air than with CO2 (1.54 vs. 0.18 cm, P<0.001). The ETCO2 measured immediately after the procedures was slightly higher in the CO2 group than in the air group (38.6 vs. 37.2 mm Hg, P=0.02), but the values were within the normal range. No significant adverse events occurred. Conclusions: CO2 insufflation during CCEGD reduced postprocedural pain and distension compared with air. It was comfortable and safe to use in moderately sedated outpatients.

Determination of the optimal time for premedication with pronase, dimethylpolysiloxane, and sodium bicarbonate for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Goals and Background: Premedication with pronase, dimethylpolysiloxane, and sodium bicarbonate improves visibility during upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy. However, the optimal time for this combination to take effect is unknown. We investigated the optimal time of pre-UGI endoscopy medication. Study: A randomized, investigator-blind, controlled trial. The 300 patients who were to receive premedication were randomized into 3 groups according to the following medication time before UGI endoscopy: 10 minutes (group A, n=98), 10 to 30 minutes (group B, n=97), and 30 minutes premedication (group C, n=99). Visibility scores (range, 1 to 4, with lower scores indicating better gastric mucosal visibility) were assessed for the antrum, lower body, upper body, and fundus and compared, including the sum of the scores, between the 3 groups. Results: Group B had significantly lower visibility scores for the lower body, upper body, and fundus than group C (P=0.001, 0.009, and 0.002, respectively). Group A obtained significantly lower scores for the antrum and lower body than group C (P=0.007 and 0.005, respectively). The total visibility scores of groups A and B were significantly lower compared with those of group C (P=0.001, 0.003, respectively). Conclusions: Administration of pronase, dimethylpolysiloxane, and sodium bicarbonate within 30 minutes before UGI endoscopy significantly improved endoscopic visualization. However, the optimal time to achieve the best visibility was between 10 to 30 minutes before UGI endoscopy.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Background Gastrointestinal symptoms are common in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in Korea appears to be increasing. Some studies have shown that T2DM is a risk factor for symptomatic GERD. However, this possibility is still debated, and the pathogenesis of GERD in T2DM is not yet fully understood. The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence and risk factors (including autonomic neuropathy) of GERD in patients with T2DM. Methods This cross-sectional case-control study enrolled T2DM patients (n=258) and healthy controls (n=184). All participants underwent physical examinations and laboratory tests. We evaluated medical records and long-term diabetes complications, including peripheral and autonomic neuropathy in patients with T2DM. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed in all patients. The Los Angeles (LA) classification was used to grade GERD. GERD was defined as LA grade A (or higher) or minimal change with GERD symptoms. GERD symptoms were examined using a frequency scale. Data were expressed as mean±standard error. Independent t-tests or chi-square tests were used to make comparisons between groups. Results The prevalence of GERD (32.6% vs. 35.9%, P=0.266) and GERD symptoms (58.8% vs. 59.2%, P=0.503) was not significantly different between T2DM patients and controls. We found no significant differences between T2DM patients with GERD and T2DM patients without GERD with respect to diabetic complications, including autonomic neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy, duration of DM, and glucose control. Conclusion The prevalence of GERD in patients with T2DM showed no difference from that of controls. GERD was also not associated with peripheral and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy, age, or duration of DM in patients with T2DM.

The Effect of Indigocarmine on Improvement of the Polyp Detection Rate during Colonoscopic Examination with Hood Cap

Background/Aims Hood cap-assisted chromocolonoscopy using indigocarmine is expected to improve the detection rate of colorectal polyps, especially adenomatous polyps. Therefore, aim of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of hood cap-assisted chromocolonoscopy in routine colonoscopic examinations. Methods From January, 2013 through March, 2013, a total of 86 patients were enrolled (M:F=33:53, mean age=60 years). For each patient, hood cap-assisted colonoscopic examination was performed, followed by hood cap-assisted chromocolonoscopy using 0.2% indigocarmine from the cecum to the hepatic flexure. Total numbers and characteristics of polyps were compared before and after indigo carmine dye spraying. Results Prior to dye spraying, 48 polyps were found in 37 patients, and after dye spraying, 53 additional polyps were found in 34 patients. Of these undetected polyps, 45 (85%) were small sized polyps (≤0.5 cm). Histologically, 19 (36%) were adenomatous polyps, and of these, 15 (28%) were tubular adenomas and 4 (8%) were serrated adenomas. As for the polyp detection rate, there was no difference between the expert and the non-expert groups. Conclusion Hood cap-assisted chromocolonoscopic examination using indigocarmine was helpful in detecting cecum and ascending colon polyps, especially small sized polyps (<0.5 cm) and neoplastic polyps.

Inadequate Bowel Cleansing Efficacy of Split-dose Polyethylene Glycol for Colonoscopy in Type 2 Diabetic Patients: A Prospective and Blinded Study.

Background/Aims: Split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) is considered a standard bowel preparation regimen for colonoscopy in the general population. However, it is not clear whether the regimen is optimal for colonoscopy in diabetic patients. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of split-dose PEG for diabetic versus nondiabetic patients. Methods: This is a single-center, prospective, investigator-blinded study. A total of 55 consecutive nondiabetic and 50 diabetic patients ingested 2 L PEG solution on the day before the procedure and then 2 L of the solution on the day of colonoscopy. The quality of bowel preparation was graded using the Ottawa scale. Results: There was a significant difference in bowel preparation quality, with a worse preparation except for mid colon in diabetic group (total score: 7.06±1.69 vs. 5.54±1.97, P<0.001; right colon: 2.28±0.57 vs. 1.81±0.72, P<0.001; mid colon: 1.70±0.54 vs. 1.56±0.66, P=0.253; rectosigmoid colon: 1.70±0.76 vs. 1.14±0.62, P<0.001; fluid volume: 1.38±0.53 vs. 1.01±0.59, P=0.001). About 70% of nondiabetic patients had an adequate preparation compared with only 40% of diabetic patients (P=0.003). Diabetic group had longer cecal intubation time (6.4±3.6 vs. 4.5±2.4, P=0.002) and total procedure time (22.1±7.6 vs. 18.1±8.5, P=0.015). Compliance and adverse events were not significantly different. In diabetic group, inadequate bowel preparation had a significant association with higher fasting plasma glucose (136.9±21.8 vs. 121.8±19.4 mg/dL, P=0.016). Conclusions: Diabetic patients had a worse preparation quality and longer cecal intubation and total procedure time compared with nondiabetic patients. These data suggest that split-dose PEG preparation regimen is not sufficient for optimal bowel preparation in diabetic patients undergoing colonoscopy.