Robotic Colonoscopy Endotics with Colon Wash: Two Performing Technologies in a Winning Combination

F. Cosentino, A. Rigante, R. Barbera, R. Giuberti, R. Tinelli, S. Zanardi
{"title":"Robotic Colonoscopy Endotics with Colon Wash: Two Performing Technologies in a Winning Combination","authors":"F. Cosentino, A. Rigante, R. Barbera, R. Giuberti, R. Tinelli, S. Zanardi","doi":"10.47690/WJGHE.2021.3401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the standard method for CCR prevention, diagnosis, and treatment, but it is painful and highly dependent on quality of bowel preparation. This study describes the experience of the first 150 colonoscopies performed using the Endotics System at S. Giuseppe Hospital in Milan (Italy), demonstrating the effectiveness, diagnostic quality, and lack of pain even without sedation. Moreover, at the patient's request, robotic system was combined with Colon Wash technology, able to prepare the bowel in a comfortable and effective way without use of purgatives. METHODS: The study is observational, retrospective, comparative, on a group of 150 patients, enrolled consecutively over a year. Quality of the intestinal preparation is evaluated and then reported based on BBPS for both patients who underwent Colon Wash and those who opted for the traditional preparation. In addition, the total percentage of cecal intubation and the average time needed to achieve it, in patients who have also undergone Colon Wash, are reported. RESULTS: 87 out of the 150 patients enrolled, (58%) chose intestinal preparation with Colon Wash technology. In this group, optimal preparation was obtained in 71.3% of cases. The percentage of optimal preparation among patients who chose the traditional method decreased 66.7%. Failure rates of procedure due to poor bowel preparation were 4.6% and 3.2% respectively. Cecum was achieved in 99.2% of cases with an average time of 22.5 minutes. In addition, in patients with a previous failed conventional colonoscopy, cecum was achieved in 92.3% of cases. 58 patients out of the 150 were eligible for the ADR calculation according to the ASGE guidelines, resulting in an overall ADR of 39.7% (ADR M of 60% and ADR F of 24.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Endotics system confirms its ability to perform painless procedures as effectively as conventional colonoscopy (and Journal Home: https://scienceworldpublishing.org/journals/world-journal-of-gastroenterology-hepatology-and-endoscopy/WJGHE World J Gastroenterol Hepatol Endosc Volume: 3.4 2/9 more effectively in difficult cases). Colon Wash technology allows intestinal preparation comparable to the standard one. The combination of these two technologies can increase acceptance of colonoscopy procedure and adherence to CCR screening programs.","PeriodicalId":93828,"journal":{"name":"World journal of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy","volume":"425 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47690/WJGHE.2021.3401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the standard method for CCR prevention, diagnosis, and treatment, but it is painful and highly dependent on quality of bowel preparation. This study describes the experience of the first 150 colonoscopies performed using the Endotics System at S. Giuseppe Hospital in Milan (Italy), demonstrating the effectiveness, diagnostic quality, and lack of pain even without sedation. Moreover, at the patient's request, robotic system was combined with Colon Wash technology, able to prepare the bowel in a comfortable and effective way without use of purgatives. METHODS: The study is observational, retrospective, comparative, on a group of 150 patients, enrolled consecutively over a year. Quality of the intestinal preparation is evaluated and then reported based on BBPS for both patients who underwent Colon Wash and those who opted for the traditional preparation. In addition, the total percentage of cecal intubation and the average time needed to achieve it, in patients who have also undergone Colon Wash, are reported. RESULTS: 87 out of the 150 patients enrolled, (58%) chose intestinal preparation with Colon Wash technology. In this group, optimal preparation was obtained in 71.3% of cases. The percentage of optimal preparation among patients who chose the traditional method decreased 66.7%. Failure rates of procedure due to poor bowel preparation were 4.6% and 3.2% respectively. Cecum was achieved in 99.2% of cases with an average time of 22.5 minutes. In addition, in patients with a previous failed conventional colonoscopy, cecum was achieved in 92.3% of cases. 58 patients out of the 150 were eligible for the ADR calculation according to the ASGE guidelines, resulting in an overall ADR of 39.7% (ADR M of 60% and ADR F of 24.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Endotics system confirms its ability to perform painless procedures as effectively as conventional colonoscopy (and Journal Home: https://scienceworldpublishing.org/journals/world-journal-of-gastroenterology-hepatology-and-endoscopy/WJGHE World J Gastroenterol Hepatol Endosc Volume: 3.4 2/9 more effectively in difficult cases). Colon Wash technology allows intestinal preparation comparable to the standard one. The combination of these two technologies can increase acceptance of colonoscopy procedure and adherence to CCR screening programs.
机器人结肠镜内窥镜与结肠清洗:两种表演技术的胜利组合
背景:结肠镜检查是预防、诊断和治疗CCR的标准方法,但它是痛苦的,并且高度依赖于肠道准备的质量。本研究描述了意大利米兰S. Giuseppe医院使用内镜系统进行的前150例结肠镜检查的经验,证明了其有效性、诊断质量和即使在没有镇静的情况下也没有疼痛。此外,在患者的要求下,机器人系统与结肠清洗技术相结合,能够在不使用泻药的情况下以舒适有效的方式准备肠道。方法:本研究采用观察性、回顾性、比较性研究,共纳入150例患者,连续入组一年以上。评估肠道准备的质量,然后根据BBPS对接受结肠清洗和选择传统准备的患者进行报告。此外,报告了盲肠插管的总百分比和完成插管所需的平均时间,这些患者也接受了结肠冲洗。结果:入组的150例患者中有87例(58%)选择使用结肠冲洗技术进行肠道准备。在该组中,71.3%的病例获得最佳制剂。选择传统方法的患者中最佳制剂的比例下降了66.7%。由于肠道准备不良导致的手术失败率分别为4.6%和3.2%。99.2%的病例达到盲肠,平均时间为22.5分钟。此外,在既往常规结肠镜检查失败的患者中,盲肠检查成功率为92.3%。根据ASGE指南,150例患者中有58例符合ADR计算标准,总体ADR为39.7% (ADR M为60%,ADR F为24.2%)。结论:内镜系统证实其能够像传统结肠镜检查一样有效地进行无痛手术(Journal Home: https://scienceworldpublishing.org/journals/world-journal-of-gastroenterology-hepatology-and-endoscopy/WJGHE World J Gastroenterol Hepatol Endosc Volume: 3.4 2/9在困难病例中更有效)。结肠清洗技术使肠道准备与标准的相当。这两种技术的结合可以提高结肠镜检查程序的接受度和对CCR筛查计划的依从性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信