Abstract
AbstractApplying a lubricant to the colonic mucosa and reducing the dynamic friction coefficient (DFC) between the endoscopic shaft and colonic mucosa may reduce colonoscopy invasiveness. However, the ideal lubricant viscosity remains unknown. Here, we developed a DFC measurement model integrating samples of colonic mucosa from forensic autopsy specimens into a simulated bowel bend and determined the low-friction lubricant viscosity that minimizes the DFC. Carboxymethyl cellulose, xanthan gum, hydroxyethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, and sodium polyacrylate aqueous solutions of various concentrations were used as lubricants. Low-friction lubricants minimized the load on the colonic mucosa during colonoscope insertion and reduced the total endoscopy insertion time. The highest correlation was between the DFC and the lubricant viscosity at a shear rate of 100 1/s. The lowest DFC was almost constant at approximately 0.09, irrespective of the chemical composition of the lubricant, and the low-friction lubricant viscosity (100 1/s) was 0.031–0.086 (median: 0.059). The viscosities of conventional colonoscopic lubricants were suitable for lubricating the anorectal skin owing to their low DFC, but too high for lubricating the colonic mucosa because of their high DFC. The utilization of the low-friction lubricants with the optimal viscosity can reduce the stress on colonic mucosa during colonoscopy.
Funder
This work was supported by TERUMO LIFE SCIENCE FOUNDATION and “The Translational Research program; Strategic PRomotion for practical application of INnovative medical Technology (TR-SPRINT).”
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference33 articles.
1. Durdey, P., Weston, P. M. & Williams, N. S. Colonoscopy or barium enema as initial investigation of colonic disease. Lancet (London, England) 2, 549–551 (1987).
2. Lindsay, D. C., Freeman, J. G., Cobden, I. & Record, C. O. Should colonoscopy be the first investigation for colonic disease? British medical journal.Clin. Res. 296, 167–169 (1988).
3. Dean, R. et al. A comparative study of unsedated transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy and conventional EGD. Gastrointest. Endosc. 44, 422–424 (1996).
4. Yagi, J. et al. A prospective randomized comparative study on the safety and tolerability of transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Endoscopy 37, 1226–1231 (2005).
5. Geenen, J. E., Schmitt, M. G. Jr, Wu, W. C. & Hogan, W. J. Major complications of coloscopy: bleeding and perforation. Am. J. Dig. Dis. 20, 231–235 (1975).