Castor oil as booster for colon capsule endoscopy preparation reduction: A prospective pilot study and patient questionnaire.

Kota Takashima, Yoriaki Komeda, Toshiharu Sakurai, Sho Masaki, Tomoyuki Nagai, Shigenaga Matsui, Satoru Hagiwara, Mamoru Takenaka, Naoshi Nishida, Hiroshi Kashida, Konosuke Nakaji, Tomohiro Watanabe, Masatoshi Kudo
{"title":"Castor oil as booster for colon capsule endoscopy preparation reduction: A prospective pilot study and patient questionnaire.","authors":"Kota Takashima,&nbsp;Yoriaki Komeda,&nbsp;Toshiharu Sakurai,&nbsp;Sho Masaki,&nbsp;Tomoyuki Nagai,&nbsp;Shigenaga Matsui,&nbsp;Satoru Hagiwara,&nbsp;Mamoru Takenaka,&nbsp;Naoshi Nishida,&nbsp;Hiroshi Kashida,&nbsp;Konosuke Nakaji,&nbsp;Tomohiro Watanabe,&nbsp;Masatoshi Kudo","doi":"10.4292/wjgpt.v12.i4.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preparation for colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) requires a large liquid laxative volume for capsule excretion, which compromises the procedure's tolerability.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the safety and utility of castor oil-boosted bowel preparation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective cohort study including 20 patients (age range, 16-80 years; six men and 14 women) suspected of having colorectal disease was conducted at Kindai University Hospital from September 2017 to August 2019. All patients underwent CCE because of the following inclusion criteria: previous incomplete colonoscopy in other facility (<i>n</i> = 20), history of abdominal surgery (<i>n</i> = 7), or organ abnormalities such as multiple diverticulum (<i>n</i> = 4) and adhesion after surgery (<i>n</i> = 6). The exclusion criteria were as follows: Dysphagia, history of allergic reactions to the drugs used in this study (magnesium citrate, polyethylene glycol, metoclopramide, and castor oil), possibility of pregnancy, possibility of bowel obstruction or stenosis based on symptoms, or scheduled magnetic resonance imaging within 2 wk after CCE. The primary outcome was the capsule excretion rate within the battery life, as evaluated by the total large bowel observation rate, large bowel transit time, and bowel creasing level using a five-grade scale in different colorectal segments. The secondary outcomes were complications, colorectal lesion detection rates, and patients' tolerability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The castor oil-based regimen was implemented in 17 patients. Three patients cancelled CCE because they could tolerate castor oil, but not liquid laxatives. The capsule excretion rate within the battery life was 88% (15/17). The mean large bowel transit time was 236 min. Approximately 70% of patients had satisfactory colon cleansing levels. CCE detected colon polyps (14/17, 82%) and colonic diverticulum (4/12, 33%). The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy rates for detecting colorectal polyps (size ≥ 6 mm) were 76.9%, 75.0%, and 76.4%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy rates for detection of diverticulum were 100% each. Twelve patients (71%) rated CCE as more than \"good\", confirming the new regimen's tolerability. No serious adverse events occurred during this study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The castor oil-based regimen could reduce bowel preparation dose and improve CCE tolerability.</p>","PeriodicalId":23755,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics","volume":"12 4","pages":"79-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/bd/38/WJGPT-12-79.PMC8290927.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4292/wjgpt.v12.i4.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Preparation for colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) requires a large liquid laxative volume for capsule excretion, which compromises the procedure's tolerability.

Aim: To assess the safety and utility of castor oil-boosted bowel preparation.

Methods: This prospective cohort study including 20 patients (age range, 16-80 years; six men and 14 women) suspected of having colorectal disease was conducted at Kindai University Hospital from September 2017 to August 2019. All patients underwent CCE because of the following inclusion criteria: previous incomplete colonoscopy in other facility (n = 20), history of abdominal surgery (n = 7), or organ abnormalities such as multiple diverticulum (n = 4) and adhesion after surgery (n = 6). The exclusion criteria were as follows: Dysphagia, history of allergic reactions to the drugs used in this study (magnesium citrate, polyethylene glycol, metoclopramide, and castor oil), possibility of pregnancy, possibility of bowel obstruction or stenosis based on symptoms, or scheduled magnetic resonance imaging within 2 wk after CCE. The primary outcome was the capsule excretion rate within the battery life, as evaluated by the total large bowel observation rate, large bowel transit time, and bowel creasing level using a five-grade scale in different colorectal segments. The secondary outcomes were complications, colorectal lesion detection rates, and patients' tolerability.

Results: The castor oil-based regimen was implemented in 17 patients. Three patients cancelled CCE because they could tolerate castor oil, but not liquid laxatives. The capsule excretion rate within the battery life was 88% (15/17). The mean large bowel transit time was 236 min. Approximately 70% of patients had satisfactory colon cleansing levels. CCE detected colon polyps (14/17, 82%) and colonic diverticulum (4/12, 33%). The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy rates for detecting colorectal polyps (size ≥ 6 mm) were 76.9%, 75.0%, and 76.4%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy rates for detection of diverticulum were 100% each. Twelve patients (71%) rated CCE as more than "good", confirming the new regimen's tolerability. No serious adverse events occurred during this study.

Conclusion: The castor oil-based regimen could reduce bowel preparation dose and improve CCE tolerability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
蓖麻油作为结肠胶囊内窥镜准备减少的助推器:一项前瞻性试点研究和患者问卷调查。
背景:结肠胶囊内窥镜(CCE)的准备工作需要大量的液体泻药用于胶囊排泄,这损害了手术的耐受性。目的:评价蓖麻油促肠准备的安全性和实用性。方法:本前瞻性队列研究纳入20例患者(年龄16-80岁;于2017年9月至2019年8月在金台大学医院对6名男性和14名女性疑似结直肠疾病患者进行了检查。所有患者均因以下纳入标准接受CCE:既往在其他机构进行不完全结肠镜检查(n = 20),腹部手术史(n = 7),或器官异常,如多发性憩室(n = 4)和术后粘连(n = 6)。排除标准如下:吞咽困难、本研究所用药物(柠檬酸镁、聚乙二醇、甲氧氯普胺、蓖麻油)过敏史、妊娠可能性、基于症状的肠梗阻或狭窄可能性、或CCE后2周内预定的磁共振成像。主要终点是胶囊在电池寿命内的排泄率,通过总大肠观察率、大肠运输时间和肠折痕水平在不同结直肠段采用五级量表进行评估。次要结果为并发症、结直肠病变检出率和患者耐受性。结果:17例患者采用蓖麻油为主的治疗方案。三名患者取消了CCE,因为他们可以忍受蓖麻油,但不能忍受液体泻药。电池寿命内胶囊排泄率为88%(15/17)。平均大肠运输时间为236分钟。大约70%的患者结肠清洁水平令人满意。CCE检出结肠息肉(14/17,82%)和结肠憩室(4/12,33%)。结直肠息肉(≥6mm)的检测灵敏度、特异度和诊断准确率分别为76.9%、75.0%和76.4%。憩室检测的敏感性、特异性和诊断准确率均为100%。12名患者(71%)将CCE评价为“良好”以上,证实了新方案的耐受性。本研究未发生严重不良事件。结论:以蓖麻油为基础的方案可减少肠准备剂量,提高CCE耐受性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of an amino acid beverage formulation in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: A pragmatic real-world study Hepatitis C virus treatment with glecaprevir and pibrentasvir in patients co-prescribed carbamazepine: Three case reports. Update on the strategy for intravenous fluid treatment in acute pancreatitis. Cinnamic acid regulates the intestinal microbiome and short-chain fatty acids to treat slow transit constipation. "Timing of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in post-stroke patients does not impact mortality, complications, or outcomes": Commentary.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1