1986
DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(86)71877-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carbon dioxide-insufflated colonoscopy: an ignored superior technique

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
23
1
1

Year Published

1993
1993
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
23
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, the adoption rate found in the present study was even lower than that reported 20 years ago in a survey of US hospitals in Illinois (13% for colonoscopy) [15] . A majority of endoscopists…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 84%
“…Indeed, the adoption rate found in the present study was even lower than that reported 20 years ago in a survey of US hospitals in Illinois (13% for colonoscopy) [15] . A majority of endoscopists…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 84%
“…This debate halted in the mid 1980s by the demonstration that full bowel preparation before colonoscopy, sufficient aspiration, and insufflation at colonoscopy removed any risk of potentially flammable gas concentrations [1,15,16]. Afterward, other advantages of CO 2 insufflation were reported such as less postprocedural abdominal pain, bloating, or discomfort after ambulatory colonoscopy [7,10,13,16]. These advantages are attributable to rapid passive absorption of CO 2 gas from the colon and its quick clearance from the lung [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, overdistention may decrease mucosal blood flow and potentially lead to bowel ischemia [3]. Most laparoscopic surgeons are therefore reluctant to use conventional IOC as a routine localization and screening tool during laparoscopic surgery.Recently, studies have shown the use of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) instead of atmospheric air to be effective in reducing abdominal pain caused by persistent bowel distention after ambulatory colonoscopy [4,6,7,10,13,14,16]. This is attributable to the rapid absorptive nature of CO 2 from the colonic lining: 160 times faster than nitrogen [12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dellon et al [10] reviewed 9 randomized controlled studies (6 studies of colonoscopy [1,2,11,12,13,14] and 1 study each of flexible sigmoidoscopy [15], ERCP [3], and double-balloon enteroscopy [16]) and 6 non-randomized studies [4,17,18,19,20,21] related to the safety of administering CO 2 during gastrointestinal endoscopy. Adverse respiratory complications or episodes of suppressed ventilation were not reported, although most studies excluded patients with severe respiratory compromise or COPD with known CO 2 retention.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%