Literature DB >> 34231473

The Use of a PEG/Ascorbate Booster Following Standard Bowel Preparation Improves Visualization for Capsule Endoscopy in a Randomized, Controlled Study.

Miguel José Mascarenhas-Saraiva1, Eduardo Oliveira2, Miguel Nuno Mascarenhas-Saraiva3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The increasing use of capsule endoscopy (CE) to examine the gastrointestinal tract highlights the need to establish intestinal preparations that ensure optimal visualization while maximizing patient adherence. Thus, we assessed whether bowel preparation involving dietary restriction and a booster regimen produces adequate CE visualization in a real-world clinical setting.
METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, prospective study of CE procedures at 2 tertiary-care centers. Patients were allocated to 3 groups: group 1 followed a clear liquid diet and fasting-based bowel preparation for the exploration (n = 55); group 2 followed the same procedure as group 1 and then ingested 1 L of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)/ascorbic acid booster solution when the capsule reached the small intestine (n = 55); and group 3 followed the same procedure but ingesting only 0.5 L of the booster solution (n = 56). The quality of visualization and the average gastric, orocecal and small-bowel transit times were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 166 patients participated in the study. Significantly higher quality of visualization (Park score) was obtained in group 3 (2.28 ± 0.59) than in group 1 (1.84 ± 0.54, P < .001), while there were no significant differences in the average gastric (range: 36.58- 48.32 min, P = .277), orocecal (range: 322.58-289.45 min, P = .072), and small-bowel transit time (range: 280.71-249.95 min, P = .286) between the 3 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Following a clear liquid diet and fasting-based bowel preparation for CE exploration, administering a booster solution of PEG/ascorbic acid after the capsule had reached the small intestine improves mucosal visualization and cleansing without affecting capsule transit times.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34231473      PMCID: PMC8975369          DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2021.20279

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1300-4948            Impact factor:   1.852


  22 in total

1.  Colon capsule endoscopy: Advantages, limitations and expectations. Which novelties?

Authors:  Maria Elena Riccioni; Riccardo Urgesi; Rossella Cianci; Alessandra Bizzotto; Cristiano Spada; Guido Costamagna
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-04-16

2.  Bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy - The later, the better!

Authors:  S Xavier; B Rosa; S Monteiro; C Arieira; R Magalhães; T Cúrdia Gonçalves; P Boal Carvalho; J Magalhães; M J Moreira; J Cotter
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 4.088

3.  Low-volume plus ascorbic acid vs high-volume plus simethicone bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Authors:  Stefano Pontone; Rita Angelini; Monica Standoli; Gregorio Patrizi; Franco Culasso; Paolo Pontone; Adriano Redler
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Effect of bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol on quality of capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  Sung Chul Park; Bora Keum; Yeon Seok Seo; Yong Sik Kim; Yoon Tae Jeen; Hoon Jai Chun; Soon Ho Um; Chang Duck Kim; Ho Sang Ryu
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Evaluation of different bowel preparations for small bowel capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.

Authors:  Vicente Pons Beltrán; Begoña González Suárez; Cecilia González Asanza; Enrique Pérez-Cuadrado; Servando Fernández Diez; Iñaqui Fernández-Urién; Alfredo Mata Bilbao; Jorge Carlos Espinós Pérez; Maria Jose Pérez Grueso; Lidia Argüello Viudez; Julio Valle Muñoz; Fernando Carballo Alvarez; Miguel Muñoz-Navas; Jose Llach Vila; Juan Andrés Ramírez Armengol; Joaquin Balanzó Tintoré; Teresa Sala Felis; Pedro Menchen Fernández-Pacheco
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2011-04-10       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Lack of benefit of active preparation compared with a clear fluid-only diet in small-bowel visualization for video capsule endoscopy: results of a randomized, blinded, controlled trial.

Authors:  Lawrence Hookey; Jacob Louw; Michelle Wiepjes; Natalie Rubinger; Stijn Van Weyenberg; Andrew G Day; William Paterson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Does purgative preparation influence the diagnostic yield of small bowel video capsule endoscopy?: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  T Rokkas; K Papaxoinis; K Triantafyllou; D Pistiolas; S D Ladas
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Optimal preparation for video capsule endoscopy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study.

Authors:  S A C van Tuyl; H den Ouden; M F J Stolk; E J Kuipers
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 10.093

Review 9.  Meta-analysis: efficacy of small bowel preparation for small bowel video capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  Jonathan Belsey; Cristiano Crosta; Owen Epstein; Wolfgang Fischbach; Peter Layer; Fabrizio Parente; Marc Halphen
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 2.580

10.  Bowel preparation in "real-life" small bowel capsule endoscopy: a two-center experience.

Authors:  Amir Klein; Marianna Dashkovsky; Ian Gralnek; Ravit Peled; Yehuda Chowers; Iyad Khamaysi; Ofir Har-Noy; Idan Levi; Moshe Nadler; Rami Eliakim; Uri Kopylov
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.