一项随机前瞻性研究,比较低容量肠道制剂在中国结肠镜检查准备中的效果。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276
Jianwei Shen, Hong Sheng, Hui He, Changbo Sun, Xufeng Han, Xianjie Zhu, Chunwei Wang, Ruiwei Shen, Qunqun Ye, Xiaogang Yuan, Qiang Zhao, Nuonan Yang, Jiaqi Wang, Ting Lu, Dahua Chen, Dawei Chen, Jieqiong Lin, Xiaona Shao
{"title":"一项随机前瞻性研究,比较低容量肠道制剂在中国结肠镜检查准备中的效果。","authors":"Jianwei Shen, Hong Sheng, Hui He, Changbo Sun, Xufeng Han, Xianjie Zhu, Chunwei Wang, Ruiwei Shen, Qunqun Ye, Xiaogang Yuan, Qiang Zhao, Nuonan Yang, Jiaqi Wang, Ting Lu, Dahua Chen, Dawei Chen, Jieqiong Lin, Xiaona Shao","doi":"10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the effect of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) and 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) with or without dimethicone on bowel preparation before colonoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study conducted from April 2021 to December 2021, consecutive adult patients scheduled for colonoscopy were prospectively randomized into four groups: SPMC, SPMC plus dimethicone, 3 L PEG, and 3 L PEG plus dimethicone. Primary endpoint was colon cleansing based on Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary endpoints were bubble score, time to cecal intubation, adenoma detection rate (ADR), patient safety and compliance, and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 223 and 291 patients in SPMC and 3 L PEG group, respectively. The proportion with acceptable bowel cleansing, total BBPS score and cecal intubation time were similar in all four subgroups (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Patient-reported acceptability and tolerability was significantly greater in SPMC than 3 L PEG group (<i>p</i> < 0.001); adverse events were significantly lower in SPMC than latter group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). ADR in both groups was greater than 30%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPMC had significantly higher acceptability and tolerability than 3 L PEG, however, was similar in terms of bowel-cleansing effect and cecal intubation time and hence can be used before colonoscopy preparation.</p>","PeriodicalId":21461,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A randomized prospective study comparing the effect of low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy preparation in China.\",\"authors\":\"Jianwei Shen, Hong Sheng, Hui He, Changbo Sun, Xufeng Han, Xianjie Zhu, Chunwei Wang, Ruiwei Shen, Qunqun Ye, Xiaogang Yuan, Qiang Zhao, Nuonan Yang, Jiaqi Wang, Ting Lu, Dahua Chen, Dawei Chen, Jieqiong Lin, Xiaona Shao\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the effect of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) and 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) with or without dimethicone on bowel preparation before colonoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study conducted from April 2021 to December 2021, consecutive adult patients scheduled for colonoscopy were prospectively randomized into four groups: SPMC, SPMC plus dimethicone, 3 L PEG, and 3 L PEG plus dimethicone. Primary endpoint was colon cleansing based on Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary endpoints were bubble score, time to cecal intubation, adenoma detection rate (ADR), patient safety and compliance, and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 223 and 291 patients in SPMC and 3 L PEG group, respectively. The proportion with acceptable bowel cleansing, total BBPS score and cecal intubation time were similar in all four subgroups (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Patient-reported acceptability and tolerability was significantly greater in SPMC than 3 L PEG group (<i>p</i> < 0.001); adverse events were significantly lower in SPMC than latter group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). ADR in both groups was greater than 30%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPMC had significantly higher acceptability and tolerability than 3 L PEG, however, was similar in terms of bowel-cleansing effect and cecal intubation time and hence can be used before colonoscopy preparation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估皮磷酸钠/枸橼酸镁(SPMC)和3升分剂量聚乙二醇(PEG)加或不加二甲基硅氧烷对结肠镜检查前肠道准备的影响:在这项于2021年4月至2021年12月进行的多中心、前瞻性、随机对照研究中,预定接受结肠镜检查的连续成年患者被前瞻性地随机分为四组:SPMC组、SPMC加二甲基硅氧烷组、3升PEG组和3升PEG加二甲基硅氧烷组。主要终点是根据波士顿肠道准备量表(BBPS)得出的结肠清洁度。次要终点为气泡评分、盲肠插管时间、腺瘤检出率(ADR)、患者安全性和依从性以及不良事件:SPMC 组和 3 L PEG 组分别有 223 名和 291 名患者。四个亚组中可接受肠道清洁的比例、BBPS 总分和盲肠插管时间相似(P > 0.05)。患者报告的可接受性和耐受性方面,SPMC 组明显高于 3 L PEG 组(p p 结论:SPMC 组的可接受性和耐受性明显高于 3 L PEG 组:SPMC 的可接受性和耐受性明显高于 3 L PEG,但在肠道清洁效果和盲肠插管时间方面相似,因此可用于结肠镜检查前的准备工作。
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
A randomized prospective study comparing the effect of low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy preparation in China.

Aim: To evaluate the effect of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) and 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) with or without dimethicone on bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study conducted from April 2021 to December 2021, consecutive adult patients scheduled for colonoscopy were prospectively randomized into four groups: SPMC, SPMC plus dimethicone, 3 L PEG, and 3 L PEG plus dimethicone. Primary endpoint was colon cleansing based on Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary endpoints were bubble score, time to cecal intubation, adenoma detection rate (ADR), patient safety and compliance, and adverse events.

Results: We enrolled 223 and 291 patients in SPMC and 3 L PEG group, respectively. The proportion with acceptable bowel cleansing, total BBPS score and cecal intubation time were similar in all four subgroups (p > 0.05). Patient-reported acceptability and tolerability was significantly greater in SPMC than 3 L PEG group (p < 0.001); adverse events were significantly lower in SPMC than latter group (p < 0.001). ADR in both groups was greater than 30%.

Conclusion: SPMC had significantly higher acceptability and tolerability than 3 L PEG, however, was similar in terms of bowel-cleansing effect and cecal intubation time and hence can be used before colonoscopy preparation.

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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
222
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology is one of the most important journals for international medical research in gastroenterology and hepatology with international contributors, Editorial Board, and distribution
期刊最新文献
Mitotic spindle positioning protein serves as prognostic biomarker in patients with colorectal cancer. Mortality and rate of hospitalization stratified by patients' BMI in a colonoscopy screening - a cross sectional analysis of data from Polish Colonoscopy Screening Platform. The impact of anal incontinence: psychosocial and sexual consequences and factors associated with QoL in a Norwegian outpatient population. EndoFLIP evaluation of the pylorus during minimal invasive Ivor-Levis esophagectomy. Estrogen receptor beta (ERβ) in esophageal cancer - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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