Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 28, 2015; 21(16): 4903-4910
Published online Apr 28, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i16.4903
Published online Apr 28, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i16.4903
Table 2 Results of colonoscopy n (%)
| Overall | Conventional | UPD | P value | |
| Cecal intubation rate | 100% | 100% | 100% | - |
| Cecal intubation time (min, mean ± SD) | 12.9 ± 4.3 | 13.2 ± 4.1 | 12.5 ± 2.3 | 0.455 |
| Cecal intubation time (< 15 mn) | 182 (70.0) | 92 (70.2) | 90 (69.8) | 0.935 |
| Straight insertion methods | 120 (46.1) | 58 (44.3) | 62 (48.1) | 0.540 |
| Change of the colonoscopist | 6 (2.3) | 4 (3.1) | 2 (1.6) | 0,420 |
| Absence of pain | 143 (55.0) | 64 (48.9) | 79 (61.2) | 0.045 |
- Citation: Fukuzawa M, Uematsu J, Kono S, Suzuki S, Sato T, Yagi N, Tsuji Y, Yagi K, Kusano C, Gotoda T, Kawai T, Moriyasu F. Clinical impact of endoscopy position detecting unit (UPD-3) for a non-sedated colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(16): 4903-4910
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i16/4903.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i16.4903