Literature DB >> 17681986

Bowel preparation for excretory urography is not necessary: a randomized trial.

M Jansson1, H Geijer, T Andersson.   

Abstract

Despite the fact that computed tomography is becoming more commonly used to investigate the genitourinary tract, intravenous urography still plays an important role in uroradiology. The aim of this study was to compare bowel purgation and two other preparation methods - dietary restrictions and no preparations at all - in an attempt to find the optimal procedure for uniform practice. 210 consecutive patients were randomised to three preparation groups with 70 in each group. Group 1 received standard bowel purgation, Group 2 was instructed to fast, while Group 3 had no preparation at all. Irrespective of preparation, all patients underwent the same examination procedure. The examining radiographer and evaluating radiologists were unaware of the type of preparation given. Image quality was assessed according to European Commission criteria for excretory urography. The effectiveness of bowel purgation and the amount of residual gas were scored separately. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportions with fulfilled criteria between preparation Groups 1 and 2 and Groups 1 and 3. A criterion was regarded as fulfilled only when all three observers agreed. Assessment of the amount of residual faeces proved the effectiveness of our standard bowel purgation. The results of our study show equality of the evaluated preparation methods and cannot justify further use of bowel purgation before excretory urography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17681986     DOI: 10.1259/bjr/78311002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  1 in total

1.  Comparative efficacy of combination of 1 L polyethylene glycol, castor oil and ascorbic acid versus 2 L polyethylene glycol plus castor oil versus 3 L polyethylene glycol for colon cleansing before colonoscopy: Study protocol of a randomized, double-blind, single-center study.

Authors:  Xu Tian; Wei-Qing Chen; Xiao-Ling Liu; Hui Chen; Bang-Lun Liu; Yuan-Ping Pi
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.889

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.