Skip to main content
. 2012 Apr 16;4(4):137–141. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v4.i4.137

Table 2.

Randomized controlled studies comparing the water method and air insufflation for colonoscopy: number of enrolled patients, options for sedation, cecal intubation rate and outcomes (pain, willingness to repeat the procedure, recovery time)

Study No. of patients Sedation Cecal intubation (%) Outcame measures
Pain score (0-10) Willingness to repeat Recovery time (min)
Colonoscopy studies WW Air WW Air WW Air WW Air WW Air
Leung JW et al[45] 2009 28 28 Minimal with increments as needed 100 100 1.3 4.1 0.0002 96% 96% NS 13.6 19.8
0.0005
Radaelli et al[48] 2010 116 114 On-demand 94 95 2.8 3.9 0.05 90.50% 81.60% 0.05 NR NR
Leung FW et al[46] 2010 42 40 unsedated 78 98 3.0 6 0.004 93% 78% 0.018 NR NR
Leung CW et al[47] 2010 112 114 Minimal sedation 100 100 4.1 5.3 0.001 1.41 1.471 NS NR NR
Ransibrahmanakul K et al[49] 2010 31 31 Minimal sedation 94 94 3.6 5.5 0.05 93.50% 80.6 NS 8.8 10.4 NS
Leung JW et al[22] 2011 50 50 On-demand 100 100 2.3 4.9 0.001 90% 94% NS 8.4 12.3 0.019
Hseih YH et al[51] 2011 90 89 Minimal sedation 99.9 99.9 2.5 3.4 0.02 NR NR NR NR
Pohl J et al[50] 2011 58 58 On-demand 82.8 96.5 2.8 4.2 0.02 72.40% 67.2% NS NR NR
Amato A et al[36] 2011 113 113 On-demand 97.3 99.1 2.8 4.6 0.01 90% 79.6% 0.03 0-8 0-53 NS

NR = Not reported;

1

Continuous Likert scale (1 = minimal; 7 = maximal); NS: Not significant.