Short (35-cm) versus long (60-cm) flexible sigmoidoscopy: a comparison of findings and tolerance in asymptomatic patients screened for colorectal neoplasia

Richard A. Dubow, Ronald M. Katon, Kent G. Benner, Cindy M. van Dijk, George Koval, Frederick W. Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the utility of the 35-cm versus the 60-cm flexible sigmoidoscope in screening asymptomatic patients for colorectal neoplasia. Two hundred fifty-eight patients 45 years of age or older were examined in a randomized fashion with both the 35-cm and 60-cm instruments. Fifteen percent (39/258) of patients had a total of 50 polypoid lesions 3 mm or greater in diameter (including one carcinoma). Of all polypoid lesions, 76% were detected with the 35-cm instrument compared to 98% with the 60-cm sigmoidoscope. Eighty-four percent of all polyps occurred within the distal 35 cm of colon. The mean time required to complete the examination was significantly less with the 35-cm sigmoidoscope than with the 60-cm sigmoidoscope (2.5 vs. 5.7 min). Moderate to severe discomfort was experienced by 69% of patients with the 60-cm instrument compared to only 29% with the 35-cm sigmoidoscope. Seventy-two percent of patients preferred examination with the shorter instrument compared with 7% for the longer sigmoidoscope, while 21% of patients expressed no preference. The 35-cm flexible sigmoidoscope fulfills many criteria of an effective screening test for colorectal neoplasia including rapidity of examination, safety, good sensitivity, and excellent patient acceptance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)305-308
Number of pages4
JournalGastrointestinal endoscopy
Volume31
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1985

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Short (35-cm) versus long (60-cm) flexible sigmoidoscopy: a comparison of findings and tolerance in asymptomatic patients screened for colorectal neoplasia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this