Taxa de alcance do ceco em 2032 colonoscopias/ Cecal intubation rate in 2032 colonoscopies

Authors

  • Rhaissa Martins de Oliveira
  • Daniela Girardi Pereira Linhares Rodrigues
  • Samuel Drumond Esperança
  • Yuri Padilha Gerheim
  • João Vicente Linhares Rodrigues

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv7n7-040

Keywords:

Colonoscopia, Doenças do Cólon Sigmoide, Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Taxa de Intubação Cecal, Preparação Intestinal.

Abstract

Objetivo: Avaliar a taxa de alcance do ceco das colonoscopias realizadas por um único profissional no Serviço de Endoscopia da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Juiz de Fora-MG. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo dos laudos de 2032 colonoscopias no período de janeiro de 2007 a dezembro de 2018. Foram excluídas do estudo 163 colonoscopias devido ao preparo ineficaz, lesões colorretais intransponíveis, procedimentos intervencionistas programados, controle endoscópico do reto pós-radioterapia, avaliações de coto retal visando reconstrução de trânsito intestinal e retossigmoidoscopias flexíveis realizadas com aparelho de colonoscopia. Os critérios utilizados para a identificação do ceco foram a confluência das tênias, a válvula ileocecal e o orifício apendicular. Resultados: Nas 2032 colonoscopias realizadas a taxa de alcance do ceco foi de 95,8%. As causas de não visualização do ceco foram formação de alças intestinais (69,7%), estenose da luz intestinal (14%), diverticulite (10,1%), fibrose (2,5%), processo inflamatório (2,5%) e volvo de sigmóide (1,2%). Os achados diagnósticos mais frequentes foram exame normal (38,7%), doença diverticular (37,8%) e pólipos (20,6%). Conclusão: A visualização do ceco representa um excelente critério de qualidade em colonoscopia. Fatores como preparo intestinal eficiente, experiência e técnica do colonoscopista e uso de equipamentos adequados estão diretamente associados à realização de um exame completo.

References

Mitchell RM, McCallion K, Gardiner KR, Watson RG, Collins JS. Successful colonoscopy; completion rates and reasons for incompletion. Ulster Med J. 2002;71(1):34-7.

Jaruvongvanich V, Sempokuya T, Laoveeravat P, Ungprasert P. Risk factors associated with longer cecal intubation time: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018;33(4):359-65. Review.

Lau WY, Leow CK, Li AK. History of ensoscopic and laparoscopic surgery. World J Surg. 1997;21(4):444-53.

Santos CH, Cury MS, Saad FT. Principais achados de colonoscopias realizadas em caráter de urgência e eletivas. Rev bras Coloproct. 2009;29(1):83-7.

Cahyono SB, Bayupurnama P. How to negotiate difficult colonoscopy to optimize cecal intubation rate. The Indonesian Journal of Gastroenterology Hepatology and Digestive Endoscopy. 2013;14(2):97-102. Review.

Alvi H, Rasheed T, Shaikh MA, Ali FS, Zuberi BF, Samejo AA. Impact of bowel preparation on cecal intubation time during colonoscopy. Pak J Med Sci. 2019;35(6):1516-9.

Waye JD, Bashkoff E. Total colonoscopy: is it always possible? Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;37:152-4.

Liang CM, Chiu YC, Wu KL, Tam W, Tai WC, Hu ML, et al. Impact factors for difficult cecal intubation during colonoscopy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2012;22(5):443-6.

Aljarallah B, Alshammari B. Colonoscopy completion rates and reasons for incompletion. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2011;5(2):102-7.

Brahmania M, Park J, Svarta S, Tong J, Kwok R, Enns R. Incomplete colonoscopy: Maximizing completion rates of gastroenterologists. Can J Gastroenterol. 2012;26(9):589-92.

Sousa JB, Silva SM, Fernandes MB, Nobrega AC, Almeida RM, Oliveira PG. Colonoscopies performed by resident physicians in a university teaching hospital a consecutive analysis of 1000 cases. ABCD Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2012;25(1):9-12.

Xhaja X, Church J. The use of ancillary techniques to aid colonoscope insertion. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(6):1936-9.

Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbacch D. Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;25(4):373-84. Review.

Sharara AI, Abou Mrad RR. The modern bowel preparation in colonoscopy. Gastroenterol Clin N Am. 2013;42(3):577-98. Review.

Lai JE, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69(3 Pt 2):620-5.

Bechtold ML, Mir F, Puli SR, Nguyen DL. Optimizing bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a guide to enhance quality of visualization. Ann Gastroenterol. 2016;29(2):137-46.

Kastenberg D, Bertiger G, Brogadir S. Bowel preparation quality scales for colonoscopy. World J Gastroenteron. 2018;24(26):2833-43. Review.

Gu P, Lew D, Oh SJ, Vipani A, Ko J, Hsu K, et al. Comparing the real-world effectiveness of competing colonoscopy preparations: results of prospective trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2019;114(2):305-14.

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(1):72-5.

Hsu CM, Lin WP, Su MY, Chiu CT, Ho YP, Chen PC. Factors that influence cecal intubation rate during colonoscopy in deeply sedated patients. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;27(1):76-80.

Kawasato R, Hashimoto S, Shirasawa T, Goto A, Okamoto T, Nishikawa J, et al. Correlation between obesity and metabolic syndrome-related factors and cecal intubation time during colonoscopy. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2017;10:1-7.

Matyja M, Pasternak A, Szura M, Pedziwiatr M, Major P, Rembiasz K. Cecal intubation rates in different eras of endoscopic technological development. Wideochir inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2018;13(1):67-73.

Batista RR, Lima RF, Fonseca MF, Todinov LR, Formiga GJ. Indicações de colonoscopia versus achado de pólipos e neoplasias colorretais. Rev Bras Coloproct. 2011;31(1):64-70.

Cirocco WC, Rusin LC. Confirmation of cecal intubation during colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38(4):402-6.

Wells CD, Heigh RI, Sharma VK, Crowell MD, Gurudu SR, Leighton JA, et al. Comparison of morning versus afternoon cecal intubation rates. BMC Gastroenterol. 2007;7:19. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-7-19.

Loffeld RJ, van der Putten AB. The completion rate of colonoscopy in normal daily practice: factors associated with failure. Digestion. 2009;80:267-70.

Meral M, Bengi G, Kayahan H, Akarsu M, Soyturk M, Topalak Ö, et al. Is ileocecal valve intubation essential for routine colonoscopic examination?. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;30(4):432-7.

Zhao SB, Yang X, Fang J, Wang SL, Gu L, Xia T, et al. Effect of left lateral tilt-down position on cecal intubation time: a 2-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87(3):852-61.

Oliveira RG, Faria FF, Lima Júnior AC, Rodrigues FG, Braga AC, Lanna D, et al. Análise retrospectiva de 504 colonoscopias. Rev Bras Coloproct 2010;30(2):175-82.

Luo DJ, Hui AJ, Yan KK, Ng SC, Wong VW, Chan FK, et al. A randomized comparison of ultrathin and standard colonoscope in cecal intubation rate and patient tolerance. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(3):484-90

Published

2021-07-04

How to Cite

Oliveira, R. M. de, Rodrigues, D. G. P. L., Esperança, S. D., Gerheim, Y. P., & Rodrigues, J. V. L. (2021). Taxa de alcance do ceco em 2032 colonoscopias/ Cecal intubation rate in 2032 colonoscopies. Brazilian Journal of Development, 7(7), 65738–65752. https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv7n7-040

Issue

Section

Original Papers