首页> 外文期刊>Gastroenterology research and practice >A Randomized, Endoscopist-Blinded, Prospective Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Patient Tolerability between Bowel Preparation Protocols Using Sodium Picosulfate Magnesium Citrate and Polyethylene-Glycol (1?L and 2?L) for Colonoscopy
【24h】

A Randomized, Endoscopist-Blinded, Prospective Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Patient Tolerability between Bowel Preparation Protocols Using Sodium Picosulfate Magnesium Citrate and Polyethylene-Glycol (1?L and 2?L) for Colonoscopy

机译:一种随机的内窥镜致盲的,前瞻性试验,可以使用柠檬酸钠和聚乙二醇(1〜1和2β1)的肠道制备方案之间的疗效和患者耐受性进行比较进行结肠镜检查

获取原文
           

摘要

Patient compliance during bowel preparation is important for successful colonoscopy. Bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol (PEG), the most commonly used solution for cleansing, involves the unpleasant ingestion of a large amount of liquid. Sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SP-MC) solution is an alternative option with better palatability than PEG. Therefore, in this study, we compared the efficacy and patient tolerability among the following three bowel preparation protocols: 2?L PEG-ascorbic acid (ASc), 1?L PEG-ASc plus bisacodyl, and SP-MC 340?mL plus bisacodyl. We conducted a randomized prospective endoscopist-blinded study between August 2018 and January 2019. A total of 311 patients were randomly classified into three groups according to the above-described bowel preparation protocols. To evaluate the efficacy of bowel cleansing, we used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. The degree of symptoms and the patients’ satisfaction with each bowel preparation method were investigated using a questionnaire completed before sedation for colonoscopy. The baseline characteristics were similar among the three groups. There was no significant difference in the bowel preparation quality among the three groups. However, the incidence of symptoms, such as abdominal fullness and pain, was significantly lower (P=0.006 and 0.027, respectively) while the patients’ satisfaction rate was significantly higher (P=0.012) in the SP-MC plus bisacodyl group than in the two PEG groups. In this study, the efficacy of the SP-MC plus bisacodyl solution was similar to that of the PEG solutions. However, patient tolerability and satisfaction were better in the SP-MC plus bisacodyl group than in the other groups. In conclusion, the use of SP-MC plus bisacodyl bowel preparation solution might be a better method for providing good intestinal cleansing and improving patient compliance.
机译:肠道准备期间的患者依从性对于成功的结肠镜检查很重要。用聚乙二醇(PEG)的肠道制剂,最常用的清洁溶液,涉及对大量液体的令人不愉快的摄取。柠檬酸钠氧化钴(SP-MC)溶液是一种替代选择,具有比PEG更好的可口性。因此,在本研究中,我们比较了以下三种肠道制剂方案中的疗效和患者耐受性:2?L PEG-抗坏血酸(ASC),1〜1·L PEG-ASC加双发性物,以及SP-MC 340?ML Plus Bisacodyl 。我们在2018年8月和2019年1月进行了一项随机预期内窥镜盲目的研究。根据上述肠道制备方案,共311名患者随机分为三组。为了评估肠洁面的功效,我们使用了波士顿肠道制备规模。使用在结肠镜检查之前完成的调查问卷研究了对每个肠道制备方法的症状和患者对每个肠道制备方法的满意度。三组之间的基线特征类似。三组的肠道准备质量没有显着差异。然而,症状的发生率,例如腹部丰满性和疼痛,显着降低(P = 0.006和0.027),而SP-MC Plus Bisacodyl组在SP-MC Plus Bisacodyl组中的满意度显着高于(p = 0.012)两个PEG组。在该研究中,SP-MC Plus双抗体的疗效与PEG溶液的功效类似。然而,SP-MC Plus Bisacodyl组在SP-MC Plus Bisacodyl组中患者的耐受性和满足性比其他组更好。总之,使用SP-MC Plus Bisacodyl肠道制备溶液可能是提供良好的肠道清洁和改善患者依从性的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号