title: A randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of air insufflation versus carbon dioxide insufflation during ERCP.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Visualization during GI endoscopy requires distention of the bowel lumen. Carbon dioxide (CO(2)) insufflation decreases postprocedure abdominal discomfort and distension after colonoscopy, but there have been few published studies on its use in ERCP.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To assess the safety and efficacy of CO(2) insufflation during ERCP.
  
  
  METHODS
  Double-blind, controlled, randomized trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Tertiary-care referral center.
  
  
  METHODS
  This study involved consecutive patients referred for ERCP, excluding those with known CO(2) retention or with chronic use of opiate medications.
  
  
  METHODS
  Insufflation of CO(2) versus insufflation of air.
  
  
  METHODS
  Primary outcomes were abdominal pain assessed on a visual analogue scale and abdominal distension. Secondary outcomes included transcutaneous CO(2) levels (pCO(2)) and procedural complications.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We analyzed 74 patients, 38 in the air group and 36 in the CO(2) group. Pain scores were similar in both groups 1-hour postprocedure (16 vs 11 mm in the CO(2) and air groups, respectively; P = .29) as well as over the subsequent 24 hours. There were also no significant differences between groups in abdominal distension or pCO(2) levels. There were 13 patients with complications in the air group and 5 in the CO(2) group (P = .04; nominal significance removed by Bonferroni correction), although most complications were minor in nature.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Single-center study.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The use of CO(2) for insufflation during ERCP was safe in a tertiary-care referral population. However, use of CO(2) during ERCP did not lead to decreased postprocedural pain or less abdominal distension, so its role in this procedure remains in question. NCT00685386.
authors.affiliation: Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7080, USA. edellon@med.unc.edu
authors.forename: Evan S
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Dellon
authors.forename: Arumugam
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Velayudham
authors.forename: Bridger W
authors.initials: BW
authors.lastname: Clarke
authors.forename: Kim L
authors.initials: KL
authors.lastname: Isaacs
authors.forename: Lisa M
authors.initials: LM
authors.lastname: Gangarosa
authors.forename: Joseph A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Galanko
authors.forename: Ian S
authors.initials: IS
authors.lastname: Grimm
mesh_terms: D015746:Abdominal Pain / Q000209:etiology; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000388:Air; D019296:Capnography / Q000295:instrumentation; D002245:Carbon Dioxide; D002760:Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009657:North Carolina; D010147:Pain Measurement; D011029:Pneumoradiography / Q000379:methods*; D055815:Young Adult
chemical_list: D002245:Carbon Dioxide