Literature DB >> 21547879

Bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: prospective randomized assessment of efficacy and of induced mucosal abnormality with three preparation agents.

I C Lawrance1, R P Willert, K Murray.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Bowel-cleansing studies are frequently underpowered, poorly designed, and use subjective bowel cleansing assessments. Consensus on efficacy, tolerability, and preparation-induced mucosal abnormalities is lacking. This study aimed to clarify the differences in efficacy and preparation-induced mucosal inflammation of sodium phosphate (NaP), colonLYTLEY (PEG), and Picoprep (Pico). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective randomized single-blinded trial of ambulatory patients to assess the efficacy of bowel preparation and preparation-induced mucosal inflammation. Proceduralists who were blinded to the preparation taken, assessed both bowel cleansing by using the Ottawa bowel preparation assessment tool and preparation-induced mucosal inflammation.
RESULTS: Of the 634 patients, 98 % ingested more than 75 % of the bowel preparation and data were complete for colonic preparation scoring in 99 %. The preparation used, time of procedure, and patient sex all independently impacted on bowel cleansing. NaP was less efficacious than PEG ( P < 0.001) and Pico ( P < 0.001) for morning procedures whereas all bowel preparations were equally efficacious for afternoon procedures. Preparation-induced mucosal inflammation was 10-fold greater with NaP ( P = 0.03) and Pico ( P = 0.03) compared with PEG.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest published prospective randomized blinded study on this topic and the first to evaluate the three major classes of preparation with a validated tool. The bowel preparation used, time of procedure, and patient sex all independently impacted on bowel cleansing. NaP gave the worst preparation for morning procedures whereas all preparations were equally effective for afternoon procedures. NaP and Pico induced mucosal inflammation 10-fold more frequently than PEG, a finding that requires further investigation. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21547879     DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1256193

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  30 in total

1.  Effectiveness of Sodium Picosulfate/Magnesium Citrate (PICO) for Colonoscopy Preparation.

Authors:  Ki Hwan Song; Wu Seok Suh; Jin Sik Jeong; Dong Sik Kim; Sang Woo Kim; Dong Min Kwak; Jong Seong Hwang; Hyun Jin Kim; Man Woo Park; Min Chul Shim; Ja-Il Koo; Jae Hwang Kim; Dae Ho Shon
Journal:  Ann Coloproctol       Date:  2014-10-28

Review 2.  Adjuncts to colonic cleansing before colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sanghoon Park; Yun Jeong Lim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  What is the best strategy for successful bowel preparation under special conditions?

Authors:  Yun Jeong Lim; Su Jin Hong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  A randomized trial to compare the efficacy and tolerability of sodium picosulfate-magnesium citrate solution vs. 4 L polyethylene glycol solution as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Miguel Muñoz-Navas; José Luis Calleja; Guillermo Payeras; Antonio José Hervás; Luis Esteban Abreu; Víctor Orive; Pedro L Menchén; José María Bordas; José Ramón Armengol; Cristina Carretero; Vicente Pons Beltrán; Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu; Román Manteca; Adolfo Parra-Blanco; Fernando Carballo; Juan Manuel Herrerías; Carlos Badiola
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Sodium phosphate does not increase risk for acute kidney injury after routine colonoscopy, compared with polyethylene glycol.

Authors:  J Bradley Layton; Philip J Klemmer; Christian F Christiansen; Andrew S Bomback; John A Baron; Robert S Sandler; Abhijit V Kshirsagar
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 11.382

6.  A validated bowel-preparation tolerability questionnaire and assessment of three commonly used bowel-cleansing agents.

Authors:  I C Lawrance; R P Willert; K Murray
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 7.  Combination could be another tool for bowel preparation?

Authors:  Jae Seung Soh; Kyung-Jo Kim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Factors related to bowel cleansing failure before colonoscopy: Results of the PACOME study.

Authors:  Gaëlle Hautefeuille; Jean Lapuelle; Stanislas Chaussade; Thierry Ponchon; B Richard Molard; Pierre Coulom; René Laugier; Franck Henri; Guillaume Cadiot
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.623

9.  How we can measure quality in colonoscopy?

Authors:  Leonidas A Bourikas; Zacharias P Tsiamoulos; Adam Haycock; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Brian P Saunders
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-10-16

Review 10.  Systematic review and meta-analysis: sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate vs. polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy preparation.

Authors:  Zheng Jin; Yi Lu; Yi Zhou; Biao Gong
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.