Literature DB >> 17111052

Commonly used preparations for colonoscopy: efficacy, tolerability, and safety--a Canadian Association of Gastroenterology position paper.

Alan Barkun1, Naoki Chiba, Robert Enns, Margaret Marcon, Susan Natsheh, Co Pham, Dan Sadowski, Stephen Vanner.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The increased demand for colonoscopy, coupled with the introduction of new bowel cleansing preparations and recent caution advisories in Canada, has prompted a review of bowel preparations by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.
METHODS: The present review was conducted by the Clinical Affairs group of committees including the endoscopy, hepatobiliary/transplant, liaison, pediatrics, practice affairs and regional representation committees, along with the assistance of Canadian experts in the field. An effort was made to systematically assess randomized prospective trials evaluating commonly used bowel cleansing preparations in Canada.
RESULTS: Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-; sodium phosphate (NaP)-; magnesium citrate (Mg-citrate)-; and sodium picosulphate, citric acid and magnesium oxide (PSMC)-containing preparations were reviewed. Regimens of PEG 2 L with bisacodyl (10 mg to 20 mg) or Mg-citrate (296 mL) are as effective as standard PEG 4 L regimens, but are better tolerated. NaP preparations appear more effective and better tolerated than standard PEG solutions. PSMC has good efficacy and tolerability but head-to-head trials with NaP solutions remain few, and conclusions equivocal. Adequate hydration during preparation and up to the time of colonoscopy is critical in minimizing side effects and improving bowel cleansing in patients receiving NaP and PSMC preparations. All preparations may cause adverse events, including rare, serious outcomes. NaP should not be used in patients with cardiac or renal dysfunction (PEG solution is preferable in these patients), bowel obstruction or ascites, and caution should be exercised when used in patients with pre-existing electrolyte disturbances, those taking medications that may affect electrolyte levels and elderly or debilitated patients. Health Canada's recommended NaP dosing for most patients is two 45 mL doses 24 h apart. However, both safety and efficacy data on this dosing schedule are lacking. Many members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology expert panel administer both doses within 24 h, as studied in clinical trials, after careful one-on-one discussion of risks and benefits in carefully selected patients. Safety data on PSMC and combination preparations in North America are limited and clinicians are encouraged to keep abreast of developments in this area.
CONCLUSIONS: All four preparations reviewed provided effective bowel cleansing for colonoscopy in the majority of patients, with varying tolerability. Adequate hydration is essential in patients receiving the preparations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17111052      PMCID: PMC2660825          DOI: 10.1155/2006/915368

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0835-7900            Impact factor:   3.522


  99 in total

1.  Hyponatremic encephalopathy after preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  B Schröppel; S Segerer; C Keuneke; C D Cohen; D Schlöndorff
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Polyethylene glycol-induced pancreatitis.

Authors:  D L Franga; J A Harris
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 3.  The diagnostic and therapeutic roles of colonoscopy: a review.

Authors:  E H Huang; J M Marks
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  The safety profile of oral sodium phosphate for colonic cleansing before colonoscopy in adults.

Authors:  Lawrence C Hookey; William T Depew; Stephen Vanner
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Efficacy and safety of sodium phosphate tablets compared with PEG solution in colon cleansing: two identically designed, randomized, controlled, parallel group, multicenter phase III trials.

Authors:  D Kastenberg; R Chasen; C Choudhary; D Riff; S Steinberg; E Weiss; L Wruble
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Prospective randomized trial comparing bowel cleaning preparations for colonoscopy.

Authors:  A Arezzo
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 1.719

7.  Oral sodium phosphate solution is a superior colonoscopy preparation to polyethylene glycol with bisacodyl.

Authors:  C J Young; R R Simpson; D W King; D Z Lubowski
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Thomas F Imperiale; Danielle R Latinovich; L Lisa Bratcher
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Low-volume oral colonoscopy bowel preparation: sodium phosphate and magnesium citrate.

Authors:  Charles Berkelhammer; Anita Ekambaram; Rogelio G Silva; Rogelia G Silva
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Carbohydrate-electrolyte rehydration protects against intravascular volume contraction during colonic cleansing with orally administered sodium phosphate.

Authors:  Robert L Barclay; William T Depew; Stephen J Vanner
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  41 in total

1.  Bowel preparation: current status.

Authors:  James E Duncan; Christie M Quietmeyer
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2009-02

2.  Risks of oral sodium phosphate for pre-colonoscopy bowel preparation in children.

Authors:  Eric Hassall; Thom E Lobe
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-04-14       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Comparison of MR enteroclysis with MR enterography and conventional enteroclysis in patients with Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Gabriele Masselli; Emanuele Casciani; Elisabetta Polettini; Gianfranco Gualdi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  The inpatient colonoscopy: a worthwhile endeavour.

Authors:  Darin Krygier; Robert Enns
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 5.  Colon cleansing before colonoscopy: does oral sodium phosphate solution still make sense?

Authors:  D K Rex; S J Vanner
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.522

6.  Hyperphosphatemia after sodium phosphate laxatives in low risk patients: prospective study.

Authors:  Marcela-Noemi Casais; Guillermo Rosa-Diez; Susana Pérez; Elina-Noemi Mansilla; Susana Bravo; Francisco-Carlos Bonofiglio
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Factors influencing quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Ronald V Romero; Sanjiv Mahadeva
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-02-16

Review 8.  Endoscopy reporting standards.

Authors:  Daphnée Beaulieu; Alan N Barkun; Catherine Dubé; Jill Tinmouth; Pierre Hallé; Myriam Martel
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.522

9.  Effects of Bowel Preparation and Fluid Restriction in Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Patients.

Authors:  Gülşah Yılmaz Karaören; Nurten Bakan; Cafer Tayyar Yürük; Ali Osman Çetinkaya
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2015-02-05

Review 10.  Cancer Care Ontario Colonoscopy Standards: standards and evidentiary base.

Authors:  L Rabeneck; R B Rumble; J Axler; A Smith; D Armstrong; C Vinden; P Belliveau; K Rhodes; C Zwaal; V Mai; P Dixon
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.522

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.