A Pilot Study About Tolerability to Double Balloon Endoscopy: Comparison to Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Colonoscopy

Jeong-Sik Byeon; Kee Jung; Hyun-Suk Song; Kee Choi; Byong Ye; Mi Do; Soon Yoon; Seung-Jae Myung; Suk-Kyun Yang; Jin-Ho Kim
November 2009
Digestive Diseases & Sciences;Nov2009, Vol. 54 Issue 11, p2434
Academic Journal
Background Although the diagnostic and therapeutic values of double balloon endoscopy (DBE) have been investigated, the subjective tolerability to DBE has not been assessed. We aimed to evaluate patients’ tolerability to DBE. Methods We prospectively enrolled patients who underwent DBE. For the comparison of tolerability to DBE with that to esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy, those who had not undergone EGD nor colonoscopy were excluded. A total of 52 patients were included. All procedures were performed under conscious sedation with midazolam with or without pethidine. Patients’ tolerability to DBE, EGD, and colonoscopy was assessed through an interview with a questionnaire using a 10-point Likert scale. Results A total of 36 patients underwent both antegrade DBE and EGD under conscious sedation. The level of abdominal pain during procedures, the level of post-procedural abdominal discomfort, and the proportion of patients with persistent abdominal discomfort until the next morning were higher in antegrade DBE. However, when analyzed in 16 patients who had good quality of sedation, the differences in the level of abdominal pain during procedures and the persistent abdominal discomfort until the next morning disappeared. A total of 23 patients underwent both retrograde DBE and colonoscopy under conscious sedation. Tolerability parameters were not different between retrograde DBE and colonoscopy. Serious complications, including hemodynamic instability, did not occur during all procedures. Conclusion Patients tolerated DBE well. DBE may be performed as comfortably as EGD and colonoscopy if the quality of sedation is good enough.


Related Articles

  • Propofol Versus Midazolam and Meperidine for Conscious Sedation in GI Endoscopy. Koshy, Gita; Nair, Satheesh; Norkus, Edward P.; Hertan, Hilary I.; Pitchumoni, C. S. // American Journal of Gastroenterology;Jun2000, Vol. 95 Issue 6, p1476 

    OBJECTIVE: Propofol (2,6-diisopropyl phenol) is a relatively new intravenous sedative hypnotic with an ideal pharmacokinetic profile for conscious sedation. In this study, we compared the safety and efficacy of propofol versus the conventional regimen of midazolam and meperidine for conscious...

  • Maximizing the general success of cecal intubation during propofol sedation in a multiendoscopist academic centre. Cardin, Fabrizio; Minicuci, Nadia; Andreotti, Alessandra; Pinetti, Elena; Campigotto, Federico; Donà, Barbara M; Martella, Bruno; Terranova, Oreste // BMC Gastroenterology;2010, Vol. 10, p123 

    Background: Achieving the target of 95% colonoscopy completion rate at centres conducting colorectal screening programs is an important issue. Large centres and teaching hospitals employing endoscopists with different levels of training and expertise risk achieving worse results. Deep sedation...

  • Synergistic sedation with midazolam and propofol versus midazolam and pethidine in colonoscopies: a prospective, randomized study Paspatis, Gregorios A.; Manolaraki, Maria; Xirouchakis, Georgios; Papanikolaou, Nikolaos; Chlouverakis, Gregorios; Gritzali, Aliki // American Journal of Gastroenterology;Aug2002, Vol. 97 Issue 8, p1963 

    OBJECTIVE:The aim of our study was to compare the safety and efficacy of the synergistic sedation with a low dose of midazolam combined with propofol versus the standard regimen of midazolam and pethidine for conscious sedation in colonoscopy in a group of patients that included a sufficient...

  • Sedation by choice may be the way to go in colonoscopy patients.  // Modern Medicine;Sep98, Vol. 66 Issue 9, p27 

    Presents an abstract of the article `Colonoscopy without sedation,' by M.S. Hoffman, T.W. Butler, et al from the `Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology' dated June 1998.

  • Variable Use of Sedation During Colonoscopy and Impact on Outcome. Shaikh, I; Iqbal, N; Khan, A; Doughan, S // American Journal of Gastroenterology;May2013, Vol. 108 Issue 5, p853 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Sedation in screening colonoscopy: impact on the quality indicators and complications" by C. Bannert and colleagues in a 2012 issue of the journal.

  • Response to Shaikh et al. Ferlitsch, Monika; Bannert, Christina; Ferlitsch, Arnulf // American Journal of Gastroenterology;May2013, Vol. 108 Issue 5, p853 

    A response from the authors of the article "Sedation in screening colonoscopy: impact on quality indicators and complications" in a 2012 issue of the journal is presented.

  • COLONOSCOPY IS SAFE WITH HIGH PROCEDURAL SUCCESS RATE AND DIAGNOSTIC YIELD IN PATIENTS AGED 80 YEARS AND OVER. Punjabi, K.; Ishaq, S.; Jammalamadaka, D.; Kuar, S.; Geoghegan, M.; Singh, P. // Gut;Apr2003 Supplement 1, Vol. 52, pA110 

    Introduction: Clinicians are reluctant to refer elderly patients for colonoscopy because of a perception of significant risk of complications and procedural failure in this age group. Methods: Data were collected prospectively over a 2 year period on indications, sedation, crude and adjusted...

  • Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with and without sedation: patients' opinions. Hoare, A.M.; Hawkins, C.F. // British Medical Journal;7/3/1976, Vol. 2 Issue 6026, p20 

    Focuses on the contention of patients on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with and without sedation. Preference for the administration of morphine over diazepam; Recognition of diazepam as the best sedation method; Enumeration of possible complications from sedation.

  • Safety of propofol for conscious sedation during endoscopic procedures in high-risk patients—a prospective, controlled study. Heuss, Ludwig T.; Schnieper, Patrizia; Drewe, Juergen; Pflimlin, Eric; Beglinger, Christoph // American Journal of Gastroenterology;Aug2003, Vol. 98 Issue 8, p1751 

    : ObjectivePropofol, a rapidly-acting hypnotic agent, is increasingly being used for endoscopic sedation. Serious adverse effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular depression, make many endoscopists reluctant to use propofol in critically ill patients. This study characterizes...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics