Hyoscine butylbromide administered at the cecum increases polyp detection: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Background and study aims: Removal of colonic polyps prevents progression of colonic neoplasia. Miss rates of polyps range from 5 % to 32 %. The effect of colonic contractility on polyp detection has not been studied adequately. Hyoscine butylbromide results in colonic spasmolysis and may improve polyp detection.

Patients and methods: Patients undergoing colonoscopy for standard indications were included and randomized to receive either 20 mg hyoscine butylbromide or placebo at cecal intubation. Operators were blind to the intervention. Data on indication, preparation, sedation, colonoscope type, times of insertion/withdrawal, polyps, and failure were recorded. The primary end point was the number of polyps detected per patient. Secondary endpoints were adenoma detection rate and polyp detection rate.

Results: A total of 303 patients received hyoscine butylbromide and 298 received placebo. More polyps per patient were identified in the hyoscine group than in the placebo group (0.91 vs. 0.70; P = 0.044). Adenoma detection rate and polyp detection rate were higher in the hyoscine arm but not significantly different (27.1 % vs. 21.8 % [P = 0.13] and 43.6 % vs. 36.6 % [P = 0.08], respectively). After adjusting for confounding variables, the odds of detecting any polyp were 1.56 higher in the hyoscine than the placebo group (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.09 – 2.21, P = 0.014). The adjusted odds of detecting any adenoma were 1.62 higher in the hyoscine group compared with the placebo group (95 %CI 1.09 – 2.42, P = 0.017). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. No adverse colonoscopy-related events were recorded. One patient experienced transient tachycardia without sequelae.

Conclusions: Hyoscine butylbromide administered at the cecum aids polyp detection. Further studies are required to determine the contribution of colonic spasm to polyp miss rates.

• References

• 1 Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 2893-2917
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 2 Jemal A, Center MM, De Santis C, Ward EM. Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010; 19: 1893-1907
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 3 Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E et al. Cancer statistics, 2006. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2006; 56: 106-130
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 4 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN. The National Polyp Study Workgroup et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. New Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 5 Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 544-560
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 6 Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 594-642
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 7 ACN Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Working Party. Guidelines for the prevention, early detection and management of colorectal cancer. Sydney: The Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network; 2005
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 8 Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. Gastroenterology 2008; 134: 1570-1595
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 9 Excellence NIfHaC. Improving outcomes in colorectal cancers. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2004
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 10 van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J et al. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 343-350
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 11 Hixson LJ, Fennerty MB, Sampliner RE, Garewal HS. Prospective blinded trial of the colonoscopic miss-rate of large colorectal polyps. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37: 125-127
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 12 Rex DK, Cutler CS, Lemmel GT et al. Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 24-28
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 13 Matsushita M, Hajiro K, Okazaki K et al. Efficacy of total colonoscopy with a transparent cap in comparison with colonoscopy without the cap. Endoscopy 1998; 30: 444-447
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 14 Rex DK, Chadalawada V, Helper DJ. Wide angle colonoscopy with a prototype instrument: impact on miss rates and efficiency as determined by back-to-back colonoscopies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 2000-2005
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 15 Harrison M, Singh N, Rex DK. Impact of proximal colon retroflexion on adenoma miss rates. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 519-522
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 16 Hixson LJ, Fennerty MB, Sampliner RE et al. Prospective study of the frequency and size distribution of polyps missed by colonoscopy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990; 82: 1769-1772
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 17 Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ et al. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-384
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 18 Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 76-79
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 19 Parra-Blanco A, Nicolas-Perez D, Gimeno-Garcia A et al. The timing of bowel preparation before colonoscopy determines the quality of cleansing, and is a significant factor contributing to the detection of flat lesions: a randomized study. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 6161-6166
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 20 Rex DK. Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 33-36
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 21 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS et al. Colonoscopic Withdrawal Times and Adenoma Detection during Screening Colonoscopy. New Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 22 Simmons DT, Harewood GC, Baron TH et al. Impact of endoscopist withdrawal speed on polyp yield: implications for optimal colonoscopy withdrawal time. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 24: 965-971
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 23 Sanchez W, Harewood GC, Petersen BT. Evaluation of polyp detection in relation to procedure time of screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 1941-1945
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 24 Corte CJ, Kim AH, Kaffes AJ. M1417: Objective measures of colonoscopic difficulty: correlation with polyp detection and operator perception. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: AB215-AB216
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 25 Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA et al. Location of adenomas missed by optical colonoscopy. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 352-359
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 26 Froehlich F. Colonoscopy: antispasmodics not only for premedication, but also during endoscope withdrawal?. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 379
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 27 Lee JM, Cheon JH, Park JJ et al. Effects of Hyosine N-butyl bromide on the detection of polyps during colonoscopy. Hepatogastroenterology 2010; 57: 90-94
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 28 Brown S, Baraza W, Hurlstone P. Chromoscopy versus conventional endoscopy for the detection of polyps in the colon and rectum. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (04) CD006439
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 29 Leufkens AM, DeMarco DC, Rastogi A et al. Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 480-489
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 30 Leung F, Harker J, Leung J et al. Removal of infused water predominantly during insertion (water exchange) is consistently associated with an increase in adenoma detection rate – review of data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of water-related methods. J Interv Gastroenterol 2011; 1: 121-126
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 31 Leung FW. Water exchange may be superior to water immersion for colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 9: 1012-1014
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 32 Tytgat GN. Hyoscine butylbromide – a review on its parenteral use in acute abdominal spasm and as an aid in abdominal diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24: 3159-3173
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 33 Grainger SL, Smith SE. Dose-response relationships of intravenous hyoscine butylbromide and atropine sulphate on heart rate in healthy volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1983; 16: 623-626
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 34 Gonzalez-Mendiola R, Sanchez Fernandez C, Prieto Montano P et al. Acute urticaria induced by hyoscine butylbromide. Allergy 2004; 59: 787-788
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 35 Treweeke P, Barrett NK. Allergic reaction to Buscopan. Br J Radiol 1987; 60: 417-418
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 36 Altintas E, Ucbilek E, Sezgin O, Sayici Y. Alverine citrate plus simethicone reduces cecal intubation time in colonoscopy – a randomized study. Turk J Gastroenterol 2008; 19: 174-179
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 37 Chaptini LA, Janec EM, Seltzer G et al. Sublingual hyoscyamine spray as premedication for colonoscopy: a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 51-55
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 38 Dumot JA, Verzola E, Nicol S et al. Sublingual hyoscyamine for patient comfort during screening sigmoidoscopy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Gastrointest Endosc 1998; 48: 283-286
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 39 Marshall JB, Patel M, Mahajan RJ et al. Benefit of intravenous antispasmodic (hyoscyamine sulfate) as premedication for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 49: 720-726
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 40 Mui LM, Ng EK, Chan KC et al. Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of intravenously administered hyoscine N-butyl bromide in patients undergoing colonoscopy with patient-controlled sedation. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 22-27
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 41 Norfleet RG. Premedication for colonoscopy: Randomized, double-blind study of glucagon versus placebo. Gastrointest Endosc 1978; 24: 164-165
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 42 Norfleet RG, Saviage K. Atropine premedication for colonoscopy: a randomized double-blind study. Gastrointest Endosc 1983; 29: 157
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 43 Waxman I, Mathews J, Gallagher J et al. Limited benefit of atropine as premedication for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1991; 37: 329-331
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 44 Yoong KY, Perkin D, Portal J et al. Intravenous hyoscine as a premedication for colonoscopy: a randomized double-blind controlled trial. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 720-722
  Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 45 Yoshikawa I, Yamasaki M, Taguchi M et al. Comparison of glucagon and scopolamine butylbromide as premedication for colonoscopy in unsedated patients. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49: 1393-1398
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 46 Cutler CS, Rex DK, Hawes RH, Lehman GA. Does routine intravenous glucagon administration facilitate colonoscopy? A randomized trial.. Gastrointest Endosc 1995; 42: 346-350
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 47 Bond JH, Chally CH, Blackwood WD. A controlled trial of premedication with dicyclomine hydrochloride (Bentyl) in colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 1974; 21: 61
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 48 Elphick DA, Donnelly MT, Smith KS, Riley SA. Factors associated with abdominal discomfort during colonoscopy: a prospective analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 21: 1076-1082
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 49 Lee YC, Wang HP, Chiu HM et al. Factors determining post-colonoscopy abdominal pain: prospective study of screening colonoscopy in 1000 subjects. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 21: 1575-1580
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 50 Takahashi Y, Tanaka H, Kinjo M, Sakumoto K. Prospective evaluation of factors predicting difficulty and pain during sedation-free colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 2005; 48: 1295-1300
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 51 Ansari A, Soon SY, Saunders BP, Sanderson JD. A prospective study of the technical feasibility of ileoscopy at colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 2003; 38: 1184-1186
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 52 Misra SP, Dwivedi M. Role of intravenously administered hyoscine butyl bromide in retrograde terminal ileoscopy: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. World J Gastroenterol 2007; 13: 1820-1823
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 53 Tee HP, Corte C, Al-Ghamdi H et al. Prospective randomized controlled trial evaluating cap-assisted colonoscopy vs standard colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 3905-3910
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 54 Ell C, Fischbach W, Bronisch HJ et al. Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 883-893
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 55 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. . Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-1308
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 56 de Wijkerslooth TR, Stoop EM, Bossuyt PM et al. Adenoma detection with cap-assisted colonoscopy versus regular colonoscopy: a randomised controlled trial. Gut In press 2011
  PubMed
• 57 Cooper GS, Chak A, Koroukian S. The polyp detection rate of colonoscopy: a national study of Medicare beneficiaries. Am J Med 2005; 118: 1413
  PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 58 Kaltenbach T, Friedland S, Soetikno R. A randomised tandem colonoscopy trial of narrow band imaging versus white light examination to compare neoplasia miss rates. Gut 2008; 57: 1406
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 59 DeMarco DC, Odstrcil E, Lara LF et al. Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope study group. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 542-550
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 60 Munroe CA, Lee P, Copland A et al. A tandem colonoscopy study of adenoma miss rates during training: a venture into uncharted territory. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 561-567
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
• 61 Francis DL, Rodriguez-Correa DT, Buchner A et al. Application of a conversion factor to estimate the adenoma detection rate from the polyp detection rate. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 493-497
  CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar