Gastrointestinal Tract - Original Article

Effect of carbon dioxide versus room air insufflation on post-colonoscopic pain: A prospective, randomized, controlled study

Volume 31 · Issue 10 Publish Date: October 15, 2020
Full Text PDF
DOI
Feyza Gündüz
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Haluk Tarık Kani
Department of Internal Medicine, Marmara University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
Shannon Chang
Division of Gastroenterology, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York
Esra Akdeniz
Department of Medical Education, Marmara University, School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
Fatih Eren
Department of Marmara University Institute of Gastroenterology, İstanbul
Yusuf Yılmaz
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Yeşim Özen Alahdab
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Gündüz, F., Kani, H. T., Chang, S., Akdeniz, E., Eren, F., Yılmaz, Y., & Özen Alahdab, Y. (2020). Effect of carbon dioxide versus room air insufflation on post-colonoscopic pain: A prospective, randomized, controlled study. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, 31(10), 676–680. https://doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2020.20596
Full Text Full Text PDF

Abstract

Background/Aims: Room air (RA) and carbon dioxide (CO2) are widely used to insufflate the colon to examine the mucosa in colonoscopy. Pain, discomfort, and bloating can be seen during and after colonoscopy secondary to bowel distention. This study aimed to investigate the effect of CO2 on post-procedure pain sensation (PPPS) in comparison with RA. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to the RA and CO2 insufflation groups in a 1:1 ratio. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to measure the pain before and after the colonoscopy. VAS score of 0 was accepted as the absence of pain and above 0 was accepted as the presence of pain. The primary outcome was to investigate the effect of CO2 insufflation on PPPS. Secondary outcomes were to investigate the other contributing factors affecting PPPS and the effect of CO2 on PPPS in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Results: A total of 204 patients were enrolled in the study. No significant difference in PPPS was seen between the 2 groups at any point in time after the colonoscopy. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in pain sensation between the CO2 and RA groups in patients with IBD. When we investigated the other contributing factors to pain sensation, body-mass index (BMI) was found to be significant at 30 minutes and BMI and colonoscopy time were found to be significant at 6 hours afterwards. Conclusion: We found no favorable effect of CO2 insufflation on PPPS in colonoscopy, including in patients with IBD.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 > >> 
Article Info
Published In
Journal Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology
Volume / Issue Volume 31 · Issue 10
Pages 676-680
History
Published Online October 15, 2020
Copyright
Affiliations
Feyza Gündüz
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Haluk Tarık Kani
Department of Internal Medicine, Marmara University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
Shannon Chang
Division of Gastroenterology, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York
Esra Akdeniz
Department of Medical Education, Marmara University, School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
Fatih Eren
Department of Marmara University Institute of Gastroenterology, İstanbul
Yusuf Yılmaz
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Yeşim Özen Alahdab
Department of Gastroenterology Marmara University School of Medicine İstanbul Turkey
Cite this Article
Gündüz, F., Kani, H. T., Chang, S., Akdeniz, E., Eren, F., Yılmaz, Y., & Özen Alahdab, Y. (2020). Effect of carbon dioxide versus room air insufflation on post-colonoscopic pain: A prospective, randomized, controlled study. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, 31(10), 676–680. https://doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2020.20596
Outlines