Search

Background and Aim. Obesity has been linked to incomplete colonoscopy. In the present study, we aimed to determine whether an abdominal compression bandage could improve the complete colonoscopy rate (CCR) of obese patients. Methods. Eligible patients were randomly allocated into the abdominal bandage and conventional groups during a routine colonoscopy. The primary outcome was CCR. Results. A total of 250 eligible patients were randomly assigned to the abdominal bandage and conventional groups from January 2021 to April 2021. Eleven patients (five in the abdominal bandage group and six in the conventional group) were excluded due to schedule cancellation after randomization, and 239 patients were eventually included in the final analysis. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding baseline characteristics (P > 0.05). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in terms of advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), bowel preparation scale (BBPS), bubble scale (BS), and withdrawal time between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, compared with the conventional group, the cecal insertion time (CIT) of the abdominal bandage group was significantly shortened (279.00 (234.50–305.75) vs. 421.00 (327.00–485.00), P

Aim. This study compared the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) combined with clip-and-snare method and a prelooping technique (CSM-PLT) with ESD alone for the treatment of gastric submucosal tumors (gSMTs). Methods. We retrospectively enrolled a matched group of 86 patients who received ESD combined with CSM-PLT or ESD alone from July 2010 to July 2020. The primary outcomes included complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection. Results. Eighty-six patients with gSMTs were enrolled in ESD combined with CSM-PLT group and ESD group, respectively. There were no significant differences in gender, age, tumor size, tumor location, and tumor origin between the two groups. The complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates were comparable between two groups (P=1, P=0.31, and P=0.25, respectively). There were no significant differences in terms of hospital stays, hospitalization cost, postoperative complications, and residual rate (P=0.42, P=0.74, P=0.65, and P=1, respectively) between the two groups. However, the ESD combined with CSM-PLT was associated with a shorter procedure duration and fewer intraoperative complications (P

Background. Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) has effectively removed esophageal submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria (MP) layer. However, clinical failure and adverse events of STER remain concerned. In this study, we described a mark-guided STER (markings before creating entry point) and evaluated its feasibility and safety for esophageal SMTs originating from MP. Methods. Patients receiving the mark-guided STER from October 2017 to July 2020 were included and followed up (ranged from 3 to 30 months). The primary outcomes included complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates. The secondary outcomes included procedure duration, main complication, and residual lesions. Results. A total of 242 patients with 242 SMTs (median diameter of 22 mm, ranging from 7 mm to 40 mm) received the mark-guided STER. The median procedure duration was 55 min (ranging from 35 min to 115 min). The complete resection, en bloc resection, and R0 resection rates were 100%, 98.3%, and 97.5%, respectively. The adverse event rate was 4.5%. However, there was no severe complication. No residual SMTs were detected during the follow-up period. Logistic regression demonstrated that the SMT size and procedure duration were independent factors associated with en bloc resection (P=0.02 and P=0.04, respectively). Moreover, logistic regression demonstrated that the SMT size was an independent risk factor for main complications (P=0.02). Conclusion. Mark-guided STER was feasible and safe to remove esophageal SMTs ≦40 mm. However, it is necessary to further verify the feasibility and safety for the esophageal SMTs >40 mm.

Background and Aims. Simethicone (SIM), as an antifoaming agent, has been shown to improve bowel preparation during colonoscopy. However, the optimal timing of SIM addition remained undetermined. We aimed to investigate the optimal timing of SIM addition to polyethylene glycol (PEG) to improve bowel preparation. Methods. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the SIM evening group (SIM addition to PEG in the evening of the day prior to colonoscopy) and the SIM morning group (SIM addition to PEG in the morning of colonoscopy). The primary outcome was Bubble Scale (BS). The secondary outcomes were Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Results. A total of 419 patients were enrolled in this study. The baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. No significant differences were observed in terms of BS (8.76 ± 0.90 vs. 8.65 ± 1.16, P = 0.81), ADR (34.1% vs. 30.8%, P = 0.47), Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) (8.59 ± 0.94 vs. 8.45 ± 1.00, P = 0.15), and withdrawal time (8.22 ± 2.04 vs. 8.01 ± 2.51, P = 0.094) between the two groups. Moreover, safety and compliance were similar in both groups. However, the SIM evening group was associated with shorter cecal intubation time (3.80 ± 1.81 vs. 4.42 ± 2.03, P