Literature DB >> 27484811

Predictors of Inadequate Bowel Preparation and Salvage Options on Colonoscopy.

Ju Sung Sim1, Ja Seol Koo1.   

Abstract

Inadequate bowel preparation is observed in more than 25% of all colonoscopies. Identification of predictive factors for inadequate colon cleaning is helpful and more detailed preparation methods should be used for patients at high risk. Age, male sex, inpatient status, and comorbidities were identified as independent risk factors in several previous studies. In patients with insufficient colon preparation, colon irrigation with endoscopic pumps or next-day colonoscopy following further bowel cleaning should be performed. In order to improve the efficacy and safety of both bowel preparation and colonoscopy, the endoscopic team should identify the patient's medical conditions and choose the optimal bowel preparation agent and regimen.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bowel preparation; Colon cleaning; Colonoscopy

Year:  2016        PMID: 27484811      PMCID: PMC4977741          DOI: 10.5946/ce.2016.094

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Endosc        ISSN: 2234-2400


INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy is regarded as the most effective tool for colorectal screening in older patients (>50 years of age) with an average risk of colorectal cancer and in younger patients with a high risk of colorectal cancer [1]. Decreased incidence of colon cancer is associated with optimal colonoscopic examination of the entire colon. Regardless of indication, the success of colonoscopy is closely related to adequate colon preparation. However, it has been reported that inadequate bowel cleaning is observed in approximately 25% of all colonoscopies [2,3]. Adverse results of insufficient colon cleaning include decreased adenoma detection and cecal intubation rates, prolonged procedural times, and shortened surveillance intervals [3-6]. Numerous studies have investigated the risk factors of inadequate bowel cleaning [7-9] and found that it occurs more frequently in patients with a history of insufficient colon cleaning, polypharmacy (due to the effect of constipating medication), obesity, old age, male patients, and in those with combined medical diseases such as diabetes mellitus, stroke, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease [10-12]. In addition, poor compliance with bowel cleaning procedures, inadequate administration of bowel preparation agent, and prolonged pre-procedure waiting times have been shown to result in poor colon cleaning [11,12]. It is crucial that physicians bear these numerous modifiable factors in mind, with the aim of reducing the incidence of failed colonoscopies and to improve results. In this section, patient-associated risk factors for inadequate colon cleaning and salvage methods will be discussed.

PATIENT-RELATED RISK FACTORS OF INADEQUATE BOWEL PREPARATION

Several studies have reported that advanced age is a predictive factor for inadequate bowel cleaning in colonoscopy. One retrospective study showed that patients aged older than 66 years were associated with insufficient bowel cleaning for colonoscopy [12]. In two recent studies in Asia, patients aged older than 60 years were found to be closely associated with inadequate colon cleaning [13,14]. It is recognized that advanced age is associated with decreased colon transit, increased comorbidity, and polypharmacy; all of which are known risk factors for poor colon cleansing [15-19]. However, a large-scale prospective study found that age was not likely to affect the quality of bowel cleaning for colonoscopy [20], although patient mean age (56 years) was significantly lower than that reported by other studies. Studies conducted in both the West and the East [20,21] have previously reported that male sex is an independent risk factor for inadequate bowel cleaning. In a study of 649 patients, 141 patients were shown to have undergone poor bowel preparation and male sex was found to be a significant predictive factor for poor bowel cleaning [20]. The relationship of comorbidities with optimal bowel preparation has previously been investigated in several studies. In a recent study of 300 outpatients who underwent colonoscopies, polypharmacy (defined as more than eight active medications available by prescription), which is an indicator of comorbidities, was found to be a risk factor for inadequate bowel cleaning [22]. Among frequent chronic diseases, diabetes in particular has been consistently associated with inadequate bowel cleaning. In a study of 367 Korean patients, it was demonstrated that the risk of poor bowel cleaning was higher in diabetic patients when compared with non-diabetic patients (odds ratio, 8.6) [13]. Taylor and Schubert [23] used a standard polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation and showed that the optimal bowel cleaning rate was 97% in non-diabetic patients compared to 62% in diabetic patients. Diabetes is associated with reduced colonic and general gastrointestinal transit [24,25], resulting in a higher occurrence of inadequate bowel cleaning. In addition, stroke and dementia are known to be high risk factors for inadequate bowel cleaning [20], possibly associated with decreased gastrointestinal motility and the patients’ capacity to follow bowel cleaning instructions. One study further revealed that previous surgery of the abdominal or pelvic organs was a risk factor for poor bowel cleaning [21]. In both inpatients and outpatients referred from other clinic, bowel preparation for colonoscopy can be inadequate and is likely associated with comorbidities. Previous studies [20,21] have shown that inpatient status is associated with increased inadequate bowel cleaning, which is further associated with prolonged immobility and low compliance with preparation procedures, due to underlying disease. In colon surgery, outpatient bowel cleaning has been associated with a better result than that of inpatients, who have increased comorbidities [24]. However, a model based on the aforementioned risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation has been shown to have a prediction rate of just 60% [11]. Therefore, in patients undergoing their first colonoscopy, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines do not recommend the use of this model for identifying those with a high risk of poor colon cleaning and modifying the colon preparation [26].

SALVAGE OPTIONS FOR INADEQUATE PREPARATION

In patients with insufficient bowel preparation, the use of endoscopic irrigation pumps or repeated colonoscopy on the following day (after further colon cleaning) is recommended by the ESGE guidelines, although evidence supporting these approaches is weak [26]. If patients with a high risk of inadequate preparation can be identified before colonoscopy, salvage options to improve the quality of bowel preparation could be used before sedation. In patients with brown liquid or solid effluent, the probability of inadequate bowel preparation has been reported to be 54% [27]. In such cases, additional bowel cleaning using large-volume enemas or extra oral purgatives could be performed. The usefulness of an endoscopic enema as a salvage method at colonoscopy has been previously described [28,29]. In those studies, patients were able to use the bathroom to remove residual fluid. One study investigated the method in 21 adults (mean age, 66 years) with insufficient bowel preparation [29]. After inserting the colonoscope as proximally as possible, enemas of either sodium phosphate (133 mL/19 g) followed by bisacodyl (37 mL/10 mg), or two bisacodyl, were administered into the colon via the colonoscope channel. After administration of the enema, successful colon preparations were reported in all cases. Another study evaluated 26 adults (median age, 59 years) using the Aronchick scale for assessment of preparation quality on the rectosigmoid colon [28]. In those patients with insufficient bowel preparation, a salvage enema with PEG (500 mL) was applied on the area of hepatic flexure through an accessory channel of the colonoscope. By adapting the method, 25 patients (96%) were converted to cases of successful bowel preparation (excellent or good). The main cause of failure at second colonoscopy was insufficient colon preparation (23%) among patients undergoing a second examination due to inadequate cleaning at first colonoscopy [30]. In such cases, examination on the following day could improve bowel preparation as opposed to examination at any other time. In a study of adult patients with a previous inadequate preparation for colonoscopy, an intensive bowel preparation method was performed before the second examination [31]. Using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), a score of 0 or 1 on any segment was regarded as inadequate preparation at first colonoscopy. In such cases, the intensive preparation method included a low-fiber diet for 3 days, followed by a liquid diet the day before colonoscopy. On the evening of the colonoscopy, bisacodyl (10 mg) with PEG-electrolyte lavage solution (ELS; 1.5 L) was administered. A second dose of PEG-ELS (1.5 L) was provided on the day of the examination. Using this method, 90% of patients were scored as having optimal cleaning on the BBPS (≥2 for each segment).

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate bowel preparation is crucial to the efficacy and safety of the colonoscopy procedure. However, bowel preparation is limited by the patient’s special conditions; such as age, sex, and underlying diseases that can prevent compliance with bowel preparation orders. Therefore, it is essential that the endoscopy team identifies the patient’s special situation and selects a proper cleaning agent and regimen, including supplemental measures, in order to improve the efficacy and safety of bowel preparation and hence colonoscopy.
  31 in total

1.  Risk factors predictive of poor quality preparation during average risk colonoscopy screening: the importance of health literacy.

Authors:  Douglas L Nguyen; Mark Wieland
Journal:  J Gastrointestin Liver Dis       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.008

2.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 10.864

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.  Inpatient vs. outpatient bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery.

Authors:  E C Lee; P L Roberts; R Taranto; D J Schoetz; J J Murray; J A Coller
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 5.  Bowel preparation for pediatric colonoscopy procedures.

Authors:  Anna Hunter; Petar Mamula
Journal:  J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.839

6.  Colonoscopic enema as rescue for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy: a prospective, observational study.

Authors:  A Horiuchi; Y Nakayama; M Kajiyama; N Kato; T Kamijima; Y Ichise; N Tanaka
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.788

7.  Decreased efficacy of polyethylene glycol lavage solution (golytely) in the preparation of diabetic patients for outpatient colonoscopy: a prospective and blinded study.

Authors:  C Taylor; M L Schubert
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Prospective, randomized trial comparing a new sodium phosphate-bisacodyl regimen with conventional PEG-ES lavage for outpatient colonoscopy preparation.

Authors:  S A Afridi; J S Barthel; P D King; J J Pineda; J B Marshall
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 9.  Constipation in old age.

Authors:  Paul Gallagher; Denis O'Mahony
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.043

10.  Appointment waiting times and education level influence the quality of bowel preparation in adult patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Authors:  Wah-Kheong Chan; Arjunan Saravanan; Jeeta Manikam; Khean-Lee Goh; Sanjiv Mahadeva
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 3.067

View more
  11 in total

1.  Efficacy and Tolerability of Prucalopride in Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Sung-Wook Park; Seok-Pyo Shin; Ji Taek Hong
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 3.845

2.  Evaluation of bowel preparation quality in patients with a history of colorectal resection.

Authors:  In Kyung Yoo; Yoon Tae Jeen; Seong Ji Choi; Hyuk Soon Choi; Bora Keum; Eun Sun Kim; Hoon Jai Chun; Hong Sik Lee; Chang Duck Kim
Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.852

3.  Bowel Prep: Nurses Do It Better.

Authors:  João Pereira da Silva
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-12-14

4.  Adenoma miss rate of polypectomy-referring hospitals is high in Korea.

Authors:  Ju Hyun Seo; Bo-In Lee; Kyungjin Lee; Jae Myung Park; Jin Soo Kim; Young-Seok Cho; Kang-Moon Lee; Sang Woo Kim; Hwang Choi; Myung-Gyu Choi
Journal:  Korean J Intern Med       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.884

5.  Impact of diet restriction on bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Seung-Joo Nam; Young Jin Kim; Bora Keum; Jae Min Lee; Seung Han Kim; Hyuk Soon Choi; Eun Sun Kim; Yeon Seok Seo; Yoon Tae Jeen; Hong Sik Lee; Hoon Jai Chun; Soon Ho Um; Chang Duck Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Whole-colon investigation vs. flexible sigmoidoscopy for suspected colorectal cancer based on presenting symptoms and signs: a multicentre cohort study.

Authors:  Amanda J Cross; Kate Wooldrage; Emma C Robbins; Kevin Pack; Jeremy P Brown; William Hamilton; Michael R Thompson; Karen G Flashman; Steve Halligan; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Margaret Vance; Brian P Saunders; Wendy Atkin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Factors Affecting Proximal Colon Cleansing Based on Bowel Movement Kinetics: A Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Dae Bum Kim; Kang-Moon Lee; Sung-Goo Kang; Sung Hoon Jung
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2019-03-03       Impact factor: 2.260

8.  Predictive factors for inadequate bowel preparation using low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid for an outpatient colonoscopy.

Authors:  Seung Yong Shin; Kyeong Seon Ga; In Young Kim; Yoo Mi Park; Da Hyun Jung; Jie-Hyun Kim; Young Hoon Youn; Hyojin Park; Jae Jun Park
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Factors affecting bowel preparation adequacy and procedural time.

Authors:  Mohammadali Zad; Cuong N Do; Aaron Heffernan; Lucy Johnston; Mohammed Al-Ansari
Journal:  JGH Open       Date:  2019-08-20

10.  Comparison of Oral Sulfate Solution and Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid on the Efficacy of Bowel Preparation.

Authors:  Ji Hyung Nam; Seok Bo Hong; Yun Jeong Lim; Seongju Lee; Hyoun Woo Kang; Jae Hak Kim; Jin Ho Lee
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2020-04-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.