Gastroenterol Res

Gastroenterology Research, ISSN 1918-2805 print, 1918-2813 online, Open Access

Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, Gastroenterol Res and Elmer Press Inc

Journal website http://www.gastrores.org

Original Article

Volume 3, Number 5, October 2010, pages 201-206

Techniques and Outcomes of Endoscopic Decompression Using Transanal Drainage Tube Placement for Acute Left-sided Colorectal Obstruction

Figures

Figure 1. (A) Abdominal CT showing sigmoid carcinoma and the dilated colon; (B) Sigmoid carcinoma showing the obstructed lumen which can be detected.

Figure 2. (A) A small-diameter upper endoscope was inserted beyond the obstruction and then the equipped guidewire was introduced; (B) After the endoscope was withdrawn, the guidewire was placed; (C) A transanal drainage tube was placed.

Tables

**Table 1.** Characteristics of 69 Patients Enrolled for Acute Left-sided Colorectal Obstruction
	No. (%)
^*Except for age, the number of the patient is shown.
Age (mean ± SD)*	71 ± 12
Gender (M/F)	36/33 (52/48)
Etiology:
Colorectal carcinoma	66 (96)
Pancreas carcinoma	1 (1)
Postoperative stenosis	1 (1)
Intussusception	1 (1)
Obstruction location:
Sigmoid colon	37 (54)
Rectum	20 (29)
Descending colon	12 (17)
Major symptoms:
Abdominal pain	69 (100)
Constipation	69 (100)
Bloating	69 (100)
Nausea/vomiting	60 (87)

**Table 2.** The Methods of Transanal Drainage Tube Placement Used for 69 Patients Undergoing Urgent Colonoscopy
Obstruction Location	Patient Number	Successful Procedure	Procedure Time (min)	Method A GW+TDT	Method B GC+BGW+TDT	Method C GC+BGW+DL+TDT
Procedure time (min) is shown as mean ± SD.
GW, guidewire; TDT, transanal drainage tube; GC, guide catheter; BGW, biliary guidewire; DL, dilator.
^*A small-diameter upper endoscope was used.
Rectum	20	20 (100%)	15 ± 6	16	4	0
Sigmoid colon	35	32 (91%)	33 ± 12	18	14	3
Descending colon	12	12 (100%)	27 ± 12	9	1	2
Sigmoid	2	2 (100%)	25	2^*	0	0
	69	66 (96%)	27 ± 13	45 (65%)	19 (28%)	5 (7%)