Literature DB >> 32691384

Comparative Effectiveness of Commercial Bowel Preparations in Ambulatory Patients Presenting for Screening or Surveillance Colonoscopy.

Shashank Sarvepalli1, Ari Garber2, Carol A Burke2, Niyati Gupta3, Mounir Ibrahim4, John McMichael5, Gareth Morris-Stiff5, Amit Bhatt2, John Vargo2, Maged Rizk2, Michael B Rothberg3,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Inadequate bowel preparation (IBP) is associated with reduced adenoma detection. However, limited research has examined the impact of different commercial bowel preparations (CBPs) on IBP and adenoma detection. We aim to determine whether type of CBP used is associated with IBP or adenoma detection.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated outpatient, screening or surveillance colonoscopies performed in the Cleveland Clinic health system between January 2011 and June 2017. IBP was defined by the Aronchick scale. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression was performed to assess the association between CBP type and IBP and adenoma detection. Fixed effects were defined as demographics, comorbidities, medication use, and colonoscopy factors. Random effect of individual endoscopist was considered.
RESULTS: Of 153,639 colonoscopies, 75,874 records met inclusion criteria. Median age was 54; 50% were female; 17.7% had IBP, and adenoma detection rate was 32.6%. In adjusted analyses, compared to GoLYTELY, only NuLYTELY [OR 0.66 (95% CI 0.60, 0.72)] and SuPREP [OR 0.53 (95% CI 0.40, 0.69)] were associated with reduced IBP. Adenoma detection did not vary based on the type of bowel preparation used.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients referred for screening or surveillance colonoscopy, choice of CBP was not associated with adenoma detection. Decisions about CBP should be based on other factors, such as tolerability, cost, or safety.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adenoma detection rate; Bowel preparation quality; Commercial bowel preparation; Inadequate bowel preparation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32691384      PMCID: PMC8794767          DOI: 10.1007/s10620-020-06492-z

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


  4 in total

1.  The timing of bowel preparation is more important than the timing of colonoscopy in determining the quality of bowel cleansing.

Authors:  Chang Soo Eun; Dong Soo Han; Yil Sik Hyun; Joong Ho Bae; Hye Sun Park; Tae Yeob Kim; Yong Cheol Jeon; Joo Hyun Sohn
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Comparison of Small Versus Large Volume Split Dose Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Study of Colonoscopy Outcomes.

Authors:  Hassan Siddiki; Sreya Ravi; Mohanad T Al-Qaisi; Ayman R Fath; Francisco Ramirez; Michael D Crowell; Rahul Pannala; Douglas O Faigel; Suryakanth R Gurudu
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Differences between morning and afternoon colonoscopies for adenoma detection in female and male patients.

Authors:  Shailendra Singh; Manish Dhawan; Monica Chowdhry; Michael Babich; Elie Aoun
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-09-06

4.  Split- versus single-dose preparation tolerability in a multiethnic population: decreased side effects but greater social barriers.

Authors:  Gabriel Perreault; Adam Goodman; Sebastian Larion; Ahana Sen; Kirsten Quiles; Michael Poles; Renee Williams
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-03-28
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.