Ultrathin colonoscope with a diameter of 9.8 mm for total colonoscopy.
BACKGROUND
The pediatric colonoscope is superior to the standard colonoscope in some patients with a fixed, angulated colon. A colonoscope thinner than the pediatric one is thought to outperform even the pediatric colonoscope in such cases. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of an ultrathin colonoscope, 9.8 mm in diameter, comparing it with pediatric and standard colonoscopes.


METHODS
Three types of colonoscopes were used: ultrathin, pediatric, and standard. A total of 287 consecutive patients were assigned to three groups: ultrathin (n=94), pediatric (n=98), and standard (n=95). First assessment was the ratio of cecal intubation and the reasons for unsuccessful colonoscopy. The second was the time to cecal intubation.


RESULTS
Cecal intubation rates were not different among three groups (96% in each). The main reasons for failed colonoscopy were looping in the ultrathin group, and angulation or stricture in the pediatric and standard groups. Mean time to the cecum was slightly longer in the ultrathin group (6.5 minutes) than the pediatric group (5.6 minutes) and standard group (6.1 minutes), but there were no significant differences among three groups.


CONCLUSIONS
Colonoscopy with the ultrathin colonoscope was as successful as with the pediatric and standard colonoscopes. The advantage of the ultrathin colonoscope might be notable in cases with stricture or severe angulation.
Okamoto
Makoto
M
Department of Gastroenterology, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. okamoto-2im@h.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Kawabe
Takao
T
Kato
Jun
J
Yamaji
Yutaka
Y
Ikenoue
Tsuneo
T
Omata
Masao
M
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002429:Cecal Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery; D020685:Colonoscopes; D003113:Colonoscopy; D004867:Equipment Design; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012189:Retrospective Studies