AIM: To compare two regimens of reduced bowel preparation and faecal tagging for CT colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single centre, prospective, randomized, noninferiority study, in which 52 consecutive adults underwentroutine CT colonography. Patients, following a three-day low-fibre diet, received one of the two reduced preparations: 1-L polyethylene glycol and four tablets of bisacodyl in association with 90 mL of Iopamidol for faecal tagging administered on the same day as CTC examination (group 1); or a standard "iodine-only" preparation, consisting in 180 ml of Iopamidol the day before the examination (group 2). Primary outcome was the overall quality of bowel preparation. RESULTS:Twenty-six patients per group were included. Per segment analysis showed preparation of diagnostic quality in 97.4% of segments in group 1 and in 95.5% in group 2 (p = ns). Per-patient analysis showed optimal quality of preparation in 76.9% of patients in group 1 and in 84.6% in group 2 (p = ns). Patient tolerability to both preparations was not different. CONCLUSION: A limited bowel preparation consisting of 1-L PEG and four tablets of bisacodyl in association with 90 mL of Iodine for faecal tagging administered on the same day as CTC examination is feasible and offers bowel cleansing comparable to "iodine-only" preparation. KEY POINTS: • Low-dose PEG bisacodyl and Iopamidol preparation is feasible, providing adequate bowel cleansing. • Faecal tagging is not different from the two limited preparations. • Patient tolerability to the two colon cleansing regimens is similar.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To compare two regimens of reduced bowel preparation and faecal tagging for CT colonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single centre, prospective, randomized, noninferiority study, in which 52 consecutive adults underwent routine CT colonography. Patients, following a three-day low-fibre diet, received one of the two reduced preparations: 1-L polyethylene glycol and four tablets of bisacodyl in association with 90 mL of Iopamidol for faecal tagging administered on the same day as CTC examination (group 1); or a standard "iodine-only" preparation, consisting in 180 ml of Iopamidol the day before the examination (group 2). Primary outcome was the overall quality of bowel preparation. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients per group were included. Per segment analysis showed preparation of diagnostic quality in 97.4% of segments in group 1 and in 95.5% in group 2 (p = ns). Per-patient analysis showed optimal quality of preparation in 76.9% of patients in group 1 and in 84.6% in group 2 (p = ns). Patient tolerability to both preparations was not different. CONCLUSION: A limited bowel preparation consisting of 1-L PEG and four tablets of bisacodyl in association with 90 mL of Iodine for faecal tagging administered on the same day as CTC examination is feasible and offers bowel cleansing comparable to "iodine-only" preparation. KEY POINTS: • Low-dose PEGbisacodyl and Iopamidol preparation is feasible, providing adequate bowel cleansing. • Faecal tagging is not different from the two limited preparations. • Patient tolerability to the two colon cleansing regimens is similar.
Authors: Amy K Hara; Mark D Kuo; Meridith Blevins; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Judy Yee; Abraham Dachman; Christine O Menias; Betina Siewert; Jugesh I Cheema; Richard G Obregon; Jeff L Fidler; Peter Zimmerman; Karen M Horton; Kevin Coakley; Revathy B Iyer; Robert A Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; C Daniel Johnson Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Marjolein H Liedenbaum; Maaike J Denters; Ayso H de Vries; Vincent F van Ravesteijn; Shandra Bipat; Frans M Vos; Evelien Dekker; Jaap Stoker Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Esther M Stoop; Margriet C de Haan; Thomas R de Wijkerslooth; Patrick M Bossuyt; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; C Yung Nio; Marc J van de Vijver; Katharina Biermann; Maarten Thomeer; Monique E van Leerdam; Paul Fockens; Jaap Stoker; Ernst J Kuipers; Evelien Dekker Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Aoife N Keeling; Michael M Slattery; Sum Leong; Eoghan McCarthy; Maja Susanto; Michael J Lee; Martina M Morrin Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Zachary S Borden; Perry J Pickhardt; David H Kim; Meghan G Lubner; Demetrios J Agriantonis; J Louis Hinshaw Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 11.105
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