![]() Future studies should focus on inexperienced colonoscopists as well as those with marked colonic spasm, in whom the greatest benefit seems to lie.Ĭolonoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis and treatment of colon disorders it has numerous roles including, but not limited to, the diagnosis and therapy of early colonic neoplasia, diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease and therapy for its complications, and for the evaluation of undifferentiated symptoms of potentially colonic origin. Antispasmodics do not offer significant benefit in polyp detection or improving patient comfort during colonoscopy. Antispasmodics probably have efficacy in reducing cecal intubation time especially in those with marked colonic spasm. ![]() There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether antispasmodics improve cecal intubation rate, predominantly because the baseline rates are already high. The drugs studied were all found to be effective gastrointestinal antispasmodics with good safety profiles. In addition to polyp detection, other colonoscopic outcome endpoints of interest include cecal and ileal intubation, and patient comfort. The pharmacology, action and safety of the agents, as well as the evidence for them improving colonoscopic outcomes will be discussed. This manuscript reviews the three most commonly used antispasmodics in colonoscopy, namely, hyoscine butylbromide (and related ammonium compounds), glucagon and peppermint oil. They may improve outcomes in colonoscopy, however their use has not been consistent or widespread. ![]() Antispasmodic drugs are cheap, effective and generally safe.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |