Sterile carbon particle suspension vs India ink for endoscopic tattooing of colonic lesions: a randomized controlled trial.
Abdominal Pain
/ etiology
Aged
Body Temperature
C-Reactive Protein
/ metabolism
Carbon
/ adverse effects
Colonic Neoplasms
/ surgery
Colonoscopy
Coloring Agents
/ adverse effects
Female
Fibrinogen
/ metabolism
Humans
Inflammation
/ blood
Injections
Laparoscopy
Leukocyte Count
Male
Middle Aged
Suspensions
Tattooing
/ methods
Cancer
Colon
Endoscopy
India ink
Sterile carbon particle suspension
Tattooing
Journal
Techniques in coloproctology
ISSN: 1128-045X
Titre abrégé: Tech Coloproctol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 9613614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2019
Nov 2019
Historique:
received:
04
08
2019
accepted:
10
10
2019
pubmed:
2
11
2019
medline:
2
7
2020
entrez:
1
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Different markers have been used preoperatively to mark colonic lesions, especially India ink. In recent years, another kind of marker has been developed: sterile carbon particle suspension (SCPS). No comparison between these two markers has yet been made. The aim of the present study was to compare the pyrogenic, inflammatory and intraperitoneal effect of these two markers. From September 2015 to December 2018, adult patients who were candidates for elective laparoscopic colon resection were randomized to the SCPS or conventional India ink injection group using computer-based randomization. The primary endpoint of the study was the presence of intraoperative adhesions related to the endoscopic tattoo. Secondary endpoints were differences in white blood cell, C-reactive protein, and fibrinogen levels as well as, abdominal pain and body temperature at baseline (before endoscopic tattooing) and 6 and 24 h after colonoscopy. Finally, the visibility of the tattoo during the minimally invasive intervention was assessed. Ninety-four patients were included in the study, 47 for each arm. There were 45/94 females (47.9%) and 49/94 males (52.1%), with a median age of 67.85 ± 9.22 years. No differences were found between groups in WBC, fibrinogen levels, body temperature or VAS scores, but we documented significantly higher CRP values at 6 and 24 h after endoscopic tattooing with India ink injection. There were significantly fewer adhesions in the SCPS Endoscopic Marker group. All the endoscopic tattoos were clearly visible. SCPS is an effective method for tattooing colonic lesions and has a better safety profile than traditional India ink in terms of post-procedure inflammatory response and intraoperative bowel adhesions. clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT03637933).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Different markers have been used preoperatively to mark colonic lesions, especially India ink. In recent years, another kind of marker has been developed: sterile carbon particle suspension (SCPS). No comparison between these two markers has yet been made. The aim of the present study was to compare the pyrogenic, inflammatory and intraperitoneal effect of these two markers.
METHODS
METHODS
From September 2015 to December 2018, adult patients who were candidates for elective laparoscopic colon resection were randomized to the SCPS or conventional India ink injection group using computer-based randomization. The primary endpoint of the study was the presence of intraoperative adhesions related to the endoscopic tattoo. Secondary endpoints were differences in white blood cell, C-reactive protein, and fibrinogen levels as well as, abdominal pain and body temperature at baseline (before endoscopic tattooing) and 6 and 24 h after colonoscopy. Finally, the visibility of the tattoo during the minimally invasive intervention was assessed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Ninety-four patients were included in the study, 47 for each arm. There were 45/94 females (47.9%) and 49/94 males (52.1%), with a median age of 67.85 ± 9.22 years. No differences were found between groups in WBC, fibrinogen levels, body temperature or VAS scores, but we documented significantly higher CRP values at 6 and 24 h after endoscopic tattooing with India ink injection. There were significantly fewer adhesions in the SCPS Endoscopic Marker group. All the endoscopic tattoos were clearly visible.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
SCPS is an effective method for tattooing colonic lesions and has a better safety profile than traditional India ink in terms of post-procedure inflammatory response and intraoperative bowel adhesions.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT03637933).
Identifiants
pubmed: 31667693
doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-02101-y
pii: 10.1007/s10151-019-02101-y
doi:
Substances chimiques
Coloring Agents
0
Suspensions
0
chinese ink
0
Carbon
7440-44-0
Fibrinogen
9001-32-5
C-Reactive Protein
9007-41-4
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03637933']
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1073-1078Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
Gastrointest Endosc. 1991 Jan-Feb;37(1):65-8
pubmed: 1706285
Colorectal Dis. 2009 Jun;11(5):527-30
pubmed: 19175629
Gastrointest Endosc. 1991 Jan-Feb;37(1):68-71
pubmed: 1706286
Gastrointest Endosc. 1975 Aug;22(1):42-3
pubmed: 1205106
Am J Surg Pathol. 1996 Oct;20(10):1266-70
pubmed: 8827034
Am Surg. 1989 Jul;55(7):457-61
pubmed: 2472762
Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1997 Jul;7(3):525-39
pubmed: 9177151
World J Emerg Surg. 2013 Jan 31;8(1):6
pubmed: 23369320
Surg Endosc. 1994 Sep;8(9):1085-7
pubmed: 7992181
Korean J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jul;64(1):45-8
pubmed: 25073671
Endoscopy. 2001 Aug;33(8):687-91
pubmed: 11490385
Dis Colon Rectum. 2003 Jul;46(7):987
pubmed: 12847379
World J Surg. 2006 Apr;30(4):605-11
pubmed: 16555023
Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl II Verh Dtsch Ges Chir. 1990;:1009-16
pubmed: 1983476
Endoscopy. 1999 Mar;31(3):271-3
pubmed: 10344435
J Gastrointest Surg. 2004 Jul-Aug;8(5):543-6
pubmed: 15239988
Am J Gastroenterol. 1996 Sep;91(9):1804-8
pubmed: 8792702
Surg Endosc. 2001 Oct;15(10):1202-3
pubmed: 11727100
Gastrointest Endosc. 1997 Feb;45(2):153-6
pubmed: 9041001
Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1997 Jul;7(3):401-11
pubmed: 9177142
Am J Gastroenterol. 1992 Jan;87(1):79-81
pubmed: 1370188
Colorectal Dis. 2011 Oct;13(10):1184-7
pubmed: 20860715
Gastrointest Endosc. 1991 Jan-Feb;37(1):99-100
pubmed: 1706288
Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Sep;56(3):339-42
pubmed: 12196769
World J Emerg Surg. 2018 Jun 19;13:24
pubmed: 29946347