Complications Associated with 355 Flexible Colonoscopic Procedures in Dogs

Abstract

Flexible colonoscopy is commonly performed in dogs with signs of large-bowel diseases. Although considered to be a safe procedure, no reports of complications associated with colonoscopy have appeared in the veterinary literature. The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency and types of adverse events that developed during flexible colonoscopy in dogs. Medical records were reviewed from 355 scheduled colonoscopic procedures. Major complications were defined as adverse events in which the dog's life was potentially jeopardized and the complication required intensive treatment or monitoring. Major complications consisting of fatal aspiration of GoLYTELY, colonic perforation, and excessive hemorrhage after biopsy of an adenocarcinoma with rigid forceps occurred in 3 (0.85%) dogs. Minor complications associated with anesthesia or colonoscopy occurred during 3.4% of procedures. Complications were classified as minor if the adverse event required minimal treatment or monitoring, and the complication was not considered a threat to the dog's life. Vomiting of GoLYTELY occurred with the administration of 4.6% of doses in 6.5% of dogs. When administering GoLYTELY, clinicians should be prepared to rapidly remove the orogastric tube and mouth speculum if vomiting occurs to reduce the potential for aspiration. In this group of dogs undergoing flexible colonoscopy, major complications occurred infrequently and minor complications developed uncommonly. Overall, minor or major complications developed during 30 (8.5%) of 355 procedures. Mortality was rare (0.28%). Flexible colonoscopy appears to be a safe procedure in dogs with signs of large-bowel diseases.

Safety and Efficacy of Oral Low‐Volume Sodium Phosphate Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy in Dogs

“…Vomition has been reported to be a complication associated with PEG administration in 6.5% of dogs receiving PEG bowel preparation. 5 Regurgitation, but not vomition, was observed more frequently after administration of the PEG control than preparations containing NaP. All episodes of regurgitation occurred during or immediately after administration of PEG.…”

“…In a recent review of dogs undergoing colonoscopy, vomiting occurred in at least 6.5% of dogs receiving this preparation. 5 Aspiration of polyethylene glycol (PEG) during administration is fatal. 5 If vomiting occurs, the current protocol recommends readministration of the lavage solution, thereby increasing stress, discomfort, and risk of aspiration by the dog.…”

“…5 Aspiration of polyethylene glycol (PEG) during administration is fatal. 5 If vomiting occurs, the current protocol recommends readministration of the lavage solution, thereby increasing stress, discomfort, and risk of aspiration by the dog. Additionally, enema administration is time consuming, and uncomfortable for the dog.…”

Multicenter retrospective evaluation of ileocecocolic perforations associated with diagnostic lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in dogs and cats

“…[2][3][4][5] Despite the increased frequency with which lower gastrointestinal endoscopy is performed, neither ileal nor cecal perforations have been reported, and none of the 4 reported colonic perforations occurred near the ileocecocolonic (ICC) valve. 6,7 Ileocecocolonic perforations occur in 0.01%-0.16% of people undergoing diagnostic endoscopy. [8][9][10][11] Although most perforations are detected by direct visualization of a rent and abdominal viscera or persistent abdominal distension, 24% are diagnosed 24-96 hours after endoscopy, typically because of persistent abdominal discomfort.…”

Chemical pneumonitis secondary to accidental pulmonary polyethylene glycol–electrolyte solution infusion in a cat

“…13 Fatal aspiration of PEG-ELS has been documented in a single dog. 13 An additional dog that aspirated PEG-ELS and immediately developed respiratory compromise recovered after aggressive measures that included bronchoscopic lavage. 14 To the authors' knowledge, PEG-ELS-induced lung injury and associated respiratory distress have not been previously reported in cats.…”