Literature DB >> 9672343

A randomized trial comparing three methods of bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy.

E Osgard1, J L Jackson, J Strong.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the optimum method of bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy.
METHODS: A total of 164 adults undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy at an ambulatory clinic were randomized to receive one of three preparations: a single hyperphosphate enema 1 h before the procedure; a hyperphosphate enema given 1 and 2 h before the procedure; or a hyperphosphate enema administered 1 and 2 h before the procedure, preceded by a 296 ml bottle of magnesium citrate taken p.o. the night before. Patients completed surveys on preparation and procedure comfort and satisfaction. The performing endoscopist assessed preparation quality, procedure duration, and depth of sigmoidoscope insertion.
RESULTS: All three preparations were equally well tolerated with slightly more diarrhea reported among patients receiving magnesium citrate (p = 0.007). The addition of magnesium citrate resulted in more procedures rated by the endoscopist as excellent or good (RR 1.5, 95% CI: 1.3-1.9), deeper sigmoidoscope insertion (56 vs 51 cm, p = 0.0036), fewer procedures requiring repeat preparation (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.04-0.98) and more procedures rated by patients as discomfort free (RR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.39-3.60). Excellent and good preparations were associated with shorter procedure duration (19 vs 14 min, p = 0.008) and greater depth of insertion (56 vs 50 cm, p = 0.003). Fewer diverticuli were noted with a single enema than the two enema preparation (p = 0.006) with the remaining outcomes equal between these two groups.
CONCLUSION: The addition of bottle of magnesium citrate to a 2-hyperphosphate enema preparation is well tolerated and improves bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9672343     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00342.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  8 in total

Review 1.  Improving the view during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a systematic review of published randomized, controlled trials comparing the use of oral bowel preparation versus enema bowel preparation.

Authors:  Muhammad Shafique Sajid; Jennifer F Caswell; Mustafa A Q Abbas; Mirza K Baig; Malcolm R McFall
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2015-04-18

2.  A prospective randomized single-blind comparison of three methods of bowel preparation for outpatient flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  A L Gidwani; R Makar; D Garrett; R Gilliland
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  A prospective randomized single blind trial of Fleet phosphate enema versus glycerin suppositories as preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  D Underwood; R R Makar; A L Gidwani; S M Najfi; P Neilly; R Gilliland
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2009-08-05       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 4.  Quality in the technical performance of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy: recommendations of an international multi-society task group.

Authors:  T R Levin; F A Farraye; R E Schoen; G Hoff; W Atkin; J H Bond; S Winawer; R W Burt; D A Johnson; L M Kirk; S C Litin; D K Rex
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Single blind, randomised trial of efficacy and acceptability of oral picolax versus self administered phosphate enema in bowel preparation for flexible sigmoidoscopy screening.

Authors:  W S Atkin; A Hart; R Edwards; C F Cook; J Wardle; P McIntyre; R Aubrey; C Baron; S Sutton; J Cuzick; A Senapati; J M Northover
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-03

6.  More Is Not Always Better: A Randomized Trial Of Low Volume Oral Laxative, Enemas, And Combination Of Both Demonstrate That Enemas Alone Are Most Efficacious For Preparation For Flexible Sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  Lawrence Hookey; Samson Haimanot; Katherine Marchut; Stephen Vanner
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 4.488

7.  Water immersion sigmoidoscopy versus standard insufflation for colorectal cancer screening: A cohort study.

Authors:  Calcedonio Calcara; Paolo Aseni; Keith Siau; Pietro Gambitta; Sergio Cadoni
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.485

8.  Korean guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and polyp detection.

Authors:  Bo-In Lee; Sung Pil Hong; Seong-Eun Kim; Se Hyung Kim; Hyun-Soo Kim; Sung Noh Hong; Dong-Hoon Yang; Sung Jae Shin; Suck-Ho Lee; Dong Il Park; Young-Ho Kim; Hyun Jung Kim; Suk-Kyun Yang; Hyo Jong Kim; Hae Jeong Jeon
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2012-03-31
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.