结肠镜检查无需限制饮食:非劣效性随机试验。

IF 2.2 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2024-03-07 eCollection Date: 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2256-5356
Salvador Machlab, Eva Martínez-Bauer, Pilar López, Pablo Ruiz-Ramirez, Bárbara Gómez, Antonio Z Gimeno-Garcia, María Del Mar Pujals, Sara Tanco, Lluïsa Sargatal, Betty Pérez, Reyes Justicia, Mónica Enguita, Nùria Piqué, Oliver Valero, Xavier Calvet, Rafel Campo
{"title":"结肠镜检查无需限制饮食:非劣效性随机试验。","authors":"Salvador Machlab, Eva Martínez-Bauer, Pilar López, Pablo Ruiz-Ramirez, Bárbara Gómez, Antonio Z Gimeno-Garcia, María Del Mar Pujals, Sara Tanco, Lluïsa Sargatal, Betty Pérez, Reyes Justicia, Mónica Enguita, Nùria Piqué, Oliver Valero, Xavier Calvet, Rafel Campo","doi":"10.1055/a-2256-5356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background and study aims</b> In colonoscopy, preparation is often regarded as the most burdensome part of the intervention. Traditionally, specific diets have been recommended, but the evidence to support this policy is insufficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the decision not to follow a restrictive diet on bowel preparation and colonoscopy outcomes. <b>Patients and methods</b> This was a multicenter, controlled, non-inferiority randomized trial with FIT-positive screening colonoscopy. The subjects were assigned to follow the current standard (1-day low residue diet [LRD]) or a liberal diet. The allocation was balanced for the risk of inadequate cleansing using the Dik et al. score. All participants received the same instructions for morning colonoscopy preparation. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate preparations as defined by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcomes included tolerability and measures of colonoscopy performance and quality. <b>Results</b> A total of 582 subjects were randomized. Of these, 278 who received the liberal diet and 275 who received the 1-day LRD were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was demonstrated with adequate preparation rates of 97.8% in the 1-day LRD and 96.4% in the liberal diet group. Tolerability was higher with the liberal diet (94.7% vs. 83.2%). No differences were found with respect to cecal intubation time, aspirated volume, or length of the examination. Global and right colon average adenoma detection rates per colonoscopy were similar. <b>Conclusions</b> The liberal diet was non-inferior to the 1-day LRD, and increased tolerability. Colonoscopy performance and quality were not affected. (NCT05032794).</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"12 3","pages":"E352-E360"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10919995/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Restrictive diets are unnecessary for colonoscopy: Non-inferiority randomized trial.\",\"authors\":\"Salvador Machlab, Eva Martínez-Bauer, Pilar López, Pablo Ruiz-Ramirez, Bárbara Gómez, Antonio Z Gimeno-Garcia, María Del Mar Pujals, Sara Tanco, Lluïsa Sargatal, Betty Pérez, Reyes Justicia, Mónica Enguita, Nùria Piqué, Oliver Valero, Xavier Calvet, Rafel Campo\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2256-5356\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background and study aims</b> In colonoscopy, preparation is often regarded as the most burdensome part of the intervention. Traditionally, specific diets have been recommended, but the evidence to support this policy is insufficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the decision not to follow a restrictive diet on bowel preparation and colonoscopy outcomes. <b>Patients and methods</b> This was a multicenter, controlled, non-inferiority randomized trial with FIT-positive screening colonoscopy. The subjects were assigned to follow the current standard (1-day low residue diet [LRD]) or a liberal diet. The allocation was balanced for the risk of inadequate cleansing using the Dik et al. score. All participants received the same instructions for morning colonoscopy preparation. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate preparations as defined by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcomes included tolerability and measures of colonoscopy performance and quality. <b>Results</b> A total of 582 subjects were randomized. Of these, 278 who received the liberal diet and 275 who received the 1-day LRD were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was demonstrated with adequate preparation rates of 97.8% in the 1-day LRD and 96.4% in the liberal diet group. Tolerability was higher with the liberal diet (94.7% vs. 83.2%). No differences were found with respect to cecal intubation time, aspirated volume, or length of the examination. Global and right colon average adenoma detection rates per colonoscopy were similar. <b>Conclusions</b> The liberal diet was non-inferior to the 1-day LRD, and increased tolerability. Colonoscopy performance and quality were not affected. (NCT05032794).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"volume\":\"12 3\",\"pages\":\"E352-E360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10919995/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2256-5356\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2256-5356","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和研究目的 在结肠镜检查中,准备工作通常被认为是干预过程中最繁重的部分。传统上,结肠镜检查会推荐特定的饮食,但支持这一政策的证据并不充分。本研究旨在评估不遵循限制性饮食的决定对肠道准备和结肠镜检查结果的影响。患者和方法 这是一项针对 FIT 阳性筛查结肠镜的多中心、对照、非劣效随机试验。受试者被分配遵循现行标准(1 天低残留饮食 [LRD])或自由饮食。根据 Dik 等人的评分对清洁不足的风险进行了平衡分配。所有参与者都接受了相同的晨间结肠镜检查准备指导。主要结果是波士顿肠道准备量表所定义的充分准备率。次要结果包括耐受性以及结肠镜检查的性能和质量。结果 共有 582 名受试者接受了随机治疗。其中,278 名接受自由饮食的受试者和 275 名接受 1 天 LRD 的受试者被纳入意向治疗分析。结果表明,1 天低热量饮食组的充分准备率为 97.8%,自由饮食组为 96.4%,不存在劣效性。自由饮食组的耐受性更高(94.7% 对 83.2%)。在盲肠插管时间、抽吸量或检查时间方面没有发现差异。每次结肠镜检查的全结肠和右结肠腺瘤平均检出率相似。结论 自由饮食不劣于 1 天 LRD,并且增加了耐受性。结肠镜检查的性能和质量未受影响。(NCT05032794)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Restrictive diets are unnecessary for colonoscopy: Non-inferiority randomized trial.

Background and study aims In colonoscopy, preparation is often regarded as the most burdensome part of the intervention. Traditionally, specific diets have been recommended, but the evidence to support this policy is insufficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the decision not to follow a restrictive diet on bowel preparation and colonoscopy outcomes. Patients and methods This was a multicenter, controlled, non-inferiority randomized trial with FIT-positive screening colonoscopy. The subjects were assigned to follow the current standard (1-day low residue diet [LRD]) or a liberal diet. The allocation was balanced for the risk of inadequate cleansing using the Dik et al. score. All participants received the same instructions for morning colonoscopy preparation. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate preparations as defined by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcomes included tolerability and measures of colonoscopy performance and quality. Results A total of 582 subjects were randomized. Of these, 278 who received the liberal diet and 275 who received the 1-day LRD were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was demonstrated with adequate preparation rates of 97.8% in the 1-day LRD and 96.4% in the liberal diet group. Tolerability was higher with the liberal diet (94.7% vs. 83.2%). No differences were found with respect to cecal intubation time, aspirated volume, or length of the examination. Global and right colon average adenoma detection rates per colonoscopy were similar. Conclusions The liberal diet was non-inferior to the 1-day LRD, and increased tolerability. Colonoscopy performance and quality were not affected. (NCT05032794).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
期刊最新文献
New cholangiopancreatoscopy-assisted diagnosis of disconnected pancreatic cuct syndrome and bridging disconnected pancreatic duct. Colonoscopy is not mammography: Challenges of applying the Duty of Candor. Complete extraction of main pancreatic duct residual and microstones using an 8-wire basket catheter. Costs and benefits of a formal quality framework for colonoscopy: Economic evaluation. Defining standards for fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy using Delphi methodology.
×
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