98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objectives: Reusable colonoscopes pose a risk of iatrogenic infections due to improper disinfection and maintenance, prompting the development of disposable colonoscopes. However, direct comparisons between disposable and reusable colonoscopes remain limited. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the technical performance of disposable colonoscopes compared to reusable ones for routine colon examinations.
Methods: This randomized controlled, noninferiority study was conducted at two endoscopy centers. Patients requiring colonoscopy were randomly assigned to either the disposable or reusable colonoscope group. The primary outcome was the successful completion rate of colonoscopy between the groups, with a noninferior margin of -10%. Secondary outcomes included image characteristics, technical maneuverability, colonoscopy performance measures, and adverse events.
Results: A total of 116 patients underwent colonoscopy (58 in each group). The successful completion rate of colonoscopy was 100% in both groups (difference: 0% [95% confidence interval -6.21% to 6.21%]), confirming noninferiority. Although the disposable colonoscope group had lower performance scorings in imaging characteristics, technical maneuverability, and longer operating time compared to the reusable colonoscope group, no significant differences were observed in cecal intubation rate, polyp detection rate, polyp characteristics, or adverse event rate. Additionally, experienced endoscopists achieved proficiency with disposable colonoscopes after approximately 10 cases, requiring minimal training.
Conclusion: With further technical advancements, disposable colonoscopes may serve as a safe and viable alternative to reusable colonoscopes for routine colon examinations in certain clinical scenarios.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/den.15040 | DOI Listing |
Endoscopy
September 2025
Centre for Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.
Objectives: We aimed to perform a multifactorial carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of the colonoscopy procedure.
Design: One-week single-center prospective study with all outpatients' diagnostic colonoscopies was realized (n=66). A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology evaluated all essential supplies (accessories from 1 to 15), endoscopic procedure (energy consumption, CO2 insufflation, bowel preparation, and sedation), staff and patients transport and waste management.
Dig Endosc
July 2025
Department of Gastroenterology, Hiroshima University Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
Dig Endosc
August 2025
Department of Gastroenterology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Objectives: Reusable colonoscopes pose a risk of iatrogenic infections due to improper disinfection and maintenance, prompting the development of disposable colonoscopes. However, direct comparisons between disposable and reusable colonoscopes remain limited. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the technical performance of disposable colonoscopes compared to reusable ones for routine colon examinations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPerioper Med (Lond)
March 2025
Department of Anesthesia, Affiliated Chenggong Hospital of Xiamen University, (73rd Army Group Hospital), Wenyuan Road No.96, Siming District, Xiamen, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Background: Carbon dioxide (CO2) accumulation during prolonged painless colonoscopy procedures in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) can lead to an increased incidence of various complications. The disposable end-expiratory CO2 device monitors the respiratory function and CO2 elimination of patients in real time, providing timely feedback to physicians. This enhances the safety and success of the procedure and improves the overall medical experience for the patient.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInfect Prev Pract
March 2025
Sinai Health/University Health Network, Department of Microbiology, Toronto, Canada.
Evaluating the effectiveness of different brush types used during the cleaning and reprocessing of flexible endoscopes is challenging. This study compared the yield of microbial growth from endoscopes that had been used clinically before and after cleaning with different brush types (bristle, squeegee, and hybrid). Endoscopes used to perform a total of 91 medical procedures on 82 patients were included.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF