Literature DB >> 20959374

Non-laxative CT colonography with barium-based faecal tagging: is additional phosphate enema beneficial and well tolerated?

W Davis1, P Nisbet, C Hare, P Cooke, S A Taylor.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of an additional phosphate enema prior to non-laxative CT colonography (CTC).
METHODS: 71 patients (mean age 80 years, 28 male, 43 female) underwent non-laxative CTC following 4 oral doses of diluted 2% w/w barium sulphate. Patients were invited to self-administer a phosphate enema 2 h before CTC. An experienced observer graded the volume of retained stool (1 (nil) to 4 (>75% bowel circumference coated)), retained fluid ((1 (nil) to 4 (>50% circumference obscured)), retained stool tagging quality (1 (untagged) to 5 (≥75% to 100%) tagged) and confidence a polyp ≥6 mm could be excluded (yes/no) for each of six colonic segments. Tolerance of the enema was assessed via questionnaire. Data were analysed between those using and not using the enema by Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact test. 18/71 patients declined the enema.
RESULTS: There was no reduction in residual stool volume with enema use compared with non-use either overall (mean score 2.6 vs 2.7, p = 0.76) or in the left colon (mean 2.3 vs 2.4, p = 0.47). Overall tagging quality was no different (mean score 4.4 vs 4.3, p = 0.43). There was significantly more retained left colonic fluid post enema (mean score 1.9 vs 1.1, p<0.0001), and diagnostic confidence in excluding polyps was significantly reduced (exclusion not possible in 35% segments vs 21% without enema, p = 0.006). Of 53 patients, 30 (56%) found the enema straightforward to use, but 4 (8%) found it unpleasant.
CONCLUSION: Phosphate enema use prior to non-laxative CTC leads to greater retained fluid, reducing diagnostic confidence, and is not recommended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20959374      PMCID: PMC3473848          DOI: 10.1259/bjr/23626544

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


  18 in total

1.  CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study.

Authors:  M R Callstrom; C D Johnson; J G Fletcher; J E Reed; D A Ahlquist; W S Harmsen; K Tait; L A Wilson; K E Corcoran
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Laxative-free CT colonography.

Authors:  Philippe Lefere; Stefaan Gryspeerdt; Marc Baekelandt; Bartel Van Holsbeeck
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  A randomised trial of hospital versus home administered enemas for flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  J N Lund; D Buckley; D Bennett; C Maxwell-Armstrong; A Smith; G Tierney; J Scholefield
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

4.  Bowel preparation at home: prospective study of adverse effects in elderly people.

Authors:  T D Heymann; K Chopra; E Nunn; L Coulter; D Westaby; I M Murray-Lyon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-21

5.  Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue?

Authors:  M Thomeer; D Bielen; D Vanbeckevoort; S Dymarkowski; A Gevers; P Rutgeerts; M Hiele; E Van Cutsem; G Marchal
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-04-24       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance.

Authors:  Philippe A Lefere; Stefaan S Gryspeerdt; Jef Dewyspelaere; Marc Baekelandt; Bartel G Van Holsbeeck
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 7.  Systematic review: adverse event reports for oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol.

Authors:  J Belsey; O Epstein; D Heresbach
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2008-08-24       Impact factor: 8.171

8.  Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation.

Authors:  Stephen L Ristvedt; Elizabeth G McFarland; Leonard B Weinstock; Eric P Thyssen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  CT colonography of colorectal polyps: a metaanalysis.

Authors:  Jacob Sosna; Martina M Morrin; Jonathan B Kruskal; Philip T Lavin; Max P Rosen; Vassilios Raptopoulos
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Single blind, randomised trial of efficacy and acceptability of oral picolax versus self administered phosphate enema in bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening.

Authors:  W S Atkin; A Hart; R Edwards; C F Cook; J Wardle; P McIntyre; R Aubrey; C Baron; S Sutton; J Cuzick; A Senapati; J M Northover
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-03
View more
  3 in total

1.  Automated image-based colon cleansing for laxative-free CT colonography computer-aided polyp detection.

Authors:  Marius George Linguraru; Neil Panjwani; Joel G Fletcher; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  Computed tomography colonography in 2014: an update on technique and indications.

Authors:  Andrea Laghi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  The second ESGAR consensus statement on CT colonography.

Authors:  Emanuele Neri; Steve Halligan; Mikael Hellström; Philippe Lefere; Thomas Mang; Daniele Regge; Jaap Stoker; Stuart Taylor; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-09-15       Impact factor: 5.315

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.