Literature DB >> 25193390

Transenteral bowel preparation for colonoscopy is more comfortable than the traditional method with no inferiority in efficacy.

Sung-Won Jung1, Da Hye Jung, Young Chul Shin, In Ho Moh, Hana Yoo, Sung Il Jang, Su Rin Shin, Jin Bae Kim, Sang Hoon Park, Myung Seok Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transenteral (TE) administration of a bowel cleanser prior to colonoscopy avoids the discomfort associated with drinking a large volume of unpalatable cleanser. AIM: To explore patient comfort, preference for future colonoscopy, the efficacy and adverse events associated with TE bowel preparation.
METHODS: Bowel preparation is traditionally practised using polyethylene glycol (PEG) + ascorbic acid (ASC), which was the treatment used in the control group (peroral group; PO group). In the study group (TE group), PEG + ASC were administered directly to the third portion of the duodenum through a scope immediately after completing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
RESULTS: A higher proportion of subjects in the TE group graded their degree of comfort as very or rather comfortable (28.4 % in the PO group, 65.1 % in the TE group; p = 0.000) and had greater preference for future colonoscopy (69.6 % in the PO group, 82.5 % in the TE group; p = 0.030), compared with the PO group. The TE group had non-inferiority in efficacy compared with the PO group (non-inferiority margin -15 %; lower limit of 95 % confidence interval for difference between success rates -6.4 %, when using the Aronchick Scale, and -7.1 % when using the Ottawa Scale). Nausea or vomiting were more prevalent during preparation in the PO group (46.1 vs. 17.5 %; p = 0.000), and dizziness was more common in the TE group (0 vs. 12.6 %; p = 0.000).
CONCLUSIONS: TE preparation was found to be more comfortable than the traditional peroral method and not inferior in efficacy. The adverse events rate was acceptable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25193390     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-014-3344-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  19 in total

1.  Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2011.

Authors:  Kyu-Won Jung; Young-Joo Won; Hyun-Joo Kong; Chang-Mo Oh; Duk Hyoung Lee; Jin Soo Lee
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 4.679

2.  Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

Authors:  Cynthia W Ko; Stacy Riffle; Jean A Shapiro; Michael D Saunders; Scott D Lee; Bruce Y Tung; Rahul Kuver; Anne M Larson; Kris V Kowdley; Michael B Kimmey
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-12-14       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  R M Ness; R Manam; H Hoen; N Chalasani
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  A randomized controlled trial evaluating a new 2-L PEG solution plus ascorbic acid vs 4-L PEG for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy.

Authors:  Flavio Valiante; Stefano Pontone; Cesare Hassan; Angelo Bellumat; Manuela De Bona; Angelo Zullo; Vincenzo de Francesco; Michele De Boni
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 4.088

Review 5.  Dizziness: a diagnostic approach.

Authors:  Robert E Post; Lori M Dickerson
Journal:  Am Fam Physician       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 3.292

6.  Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study.

Authors:  Florian Froehlich; Vincent Wietlisbach; Jean-Jacques Gonvers; Bernard Burnand; John-Paul Vader
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  A dual-action, low-volume bowel cleanser administered the day before colonoscopy: results from the SEE CLEAR II study.

Authors:  Philip O Katz; Douglas K Rex; Michael Epstein; Nav K Grandhi; Stephen Vanner; Lawrence C Hookey; Vivian Alderfer; Raymond E Joseph
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  [Effectiveness and tolerance of duodenoscopic bowel preparation for colonoscopy].

Authors:  Ju Hee Maeng; Bong Min Ko; Moon Sung Lee; Hyun Sik Na; Hyo Joong Yoon; Sang Hun Han; Sang Gyune Kim; Su Jin Hong; Chang Beom Ryu; Young Seok Kim; Jong Ho Moon; Jin Oh Kim; Joo Young Cho; Joon Seong Lee; Chan Sup Shim; Boo Sung Kim
Journal:  Korean J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-08

9.  A randomised controlled trial of a new 2 litre polyethylene glycol solution versus sodium picosulphate + magnesium citrate solution for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy.

Authors:  J Worthington; M Thyssen; G Chapman; R Chapman; M Geraint
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.580

10.  Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy.

Authors:  Christian Ell; Wolfgang Fischbach; Hans-Joachim Bronisch; Stefan Dertinger; Peter Layer; Michael Rünzi; Thomas Schneider; Günther Kachel; Jörg Grüger; Michael Köllinger; Waltraud Nagell; Karl-Josel Goerg; Roland Wanitschke; Hans-Jürgen Gruss
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 10.864

View more
  1 in total

1.  Bowel preparation: is endoscopic administration worth the extra risk?

Authors:  Yu-Hsi Hsieh; Malcolm Koo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 3.199

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.