聚乙二醇-4000 与皮磷酸钠加氧化镁和柠檬酸在儿童结肠镜检查前进行肠道清洁的有效性和安全性对比:系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition Pub Date : 2024-10-13 DOI:10.1002/jpn3.12388
Silvia Furio, Alessio Lucarini, Maurizio Mennini, Caterina Strisciuglio, Enrico Felici, Alessandro Ferretti, Pasquale Parisi, Francesco D'Angelo, Giovanni Marasco, Giovanni Barbara, Luca Ricciardi, Marisa Piccirillo, Giovanni Di Nardo
{"title":"聚乙二醇-4000 与皮磷酸钠加氧化镁和柠檬酸在儿童结肠镜检查前进行肠道清洁的有效性和安全性对比:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Silvia Furio, Alessio Lucarini, Maurizio Mennini, Caterina Strisciuglio, Enrico Felici, Alessandro Ferretti, Pasquale Parisi, Francesco D'Angelo, Giovanni Marasco, Giovanni Barbara, Luca Ricciardi, Marisa Piccirillo, Giovanni Di Nardo","doi":"10.1002/jpn3.12388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colonoscopy is performed for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The quality of colonoscopy depends on adequate bowel cleansing. However, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation in children. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability profile of polyethylene glycol (PEG) compared with those of sodium picosulfate (SPMC) in children. The primary sources of the reviewed studies were Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. The databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing PEG 4000 to SPMC as a bowel cleansing solution. Six studies were included. The analysis showed that both PEG and SPMC are effective for bowel cleansing, while a split-dose regimen may be preferable to a day-before one. There were no differences between the two groups regarding adverse events such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating, and anal discomfort. Additionally, preparation with SPMC was preferred in terms of acceptability and compliance. Still, the need to place a nasogastric tube was significantly lower in the SPMC group compared to the PEG group and in the split dose regimen compared to the day before. In conclusion, PEG and SPMC are equally effective in obtaining an adequate bowel cleansing with a comparable adverse event rate; moreover, split-dose administration may be preferable to day-before one in terms of effective bowel cleansing. However, SPMC preparation is more acceptable seems to result in higher compliance, and to reduce the use of a nasogastric tube, that we encounter daily in clinical practice, is perceived as a stressful experience for children and their families.</p>","PeriodicalId":16694,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness and safety of polyethylene-glycol-4000 versus sodium picosulphate plus magnesium oxide and citric acid for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy in children: A systematic review with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Silvia Furio, Alessio Lucarini, Maurizio Mennini, Caterina Strisciuglio, Enrico Felici, Alessandro Ferretti, Pasquale Parisi, Francesco D'Angelo, Giovanni Marasco, Giovanni Barbara, Luca Ricciardi, Marisa Piccirillo, Giovanni Di Nardo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jpn3.12388\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Colonoscopy is performed for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The quality of colonoscopy depends on adequate bowel cleansing. However, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation in children. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability profile of polyethylene glycol (PEG) compared with those of sodium picosulfate (SPMC) in children. The primary sources of the reviewed studies were Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. The databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing PEG 4000 to SPMC as a bowel cleansing solution. Six studies were included. The analysis showed that both PEG and SPMC are effective for bowel cleansing, while a split-dose regimen may be preferable to a day-before one. There were no differences between the two groups regarding adverse events such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating, and anal discomfort. Additionally, preparation with SPMC was preferred in terms of acceptability and compliance. Still, the need to place a nasogastric tube was significantly lower in the SPMC group compared to the PEG group and in the split dose regimen compared to the day before. In conclusion, PEG and SPMC are equally effective in obtaining an adequate bowel cleansing with a comparable adverse event rate; moreover, split-dose administration may be preferable to day-before one in terms of effective bowel cleansing. However, SPMC preparation is more acceptable seems to result in higher compliance, and to reduce the use of a nasogastric tube, that we encounter daily in clinical practice, is perceived as a stressful experience for children and their families.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpn3.12388\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpn3.12388","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结肠镜检查用于诊断和治疗目的。结肠镜检查的质量取决于充分的肠道清洁。然而,目前还没有儿童肠道准备的标准化方案。我们对随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估聚乙二醇(PEG)与皮下硫酸钠(SPMC)在儿童中的有效性、安全性和耐受性。所审查研究的主要来源是 Scopus、PubMed 和 Cochrane 图书馆。我们在数据库中系统地搜索了将 PEG 4000 与 SPMC 作为肠道清洁溶液进行比较的 RCT。共纳入六项研究。分析结果表明,PEG 和 SPMC 都能有效清洁肠道,而分次给药方案可能比一天前给药方案更好。在腹痛、恶心、呕吐、腹胀和肛门不适等不良反应方面,两组之间没有差异。此外,就可接受性和依从性而言,使用 SPMC 制剂更受欢迎。不过,与 PEG 组相比,SPMC 组需要放置鼻胃管的次数明显较少;与前一天相比,分次给药组需要放置鼻胃管的次数也明显较少。总之,PEG 和 SPMC 在充分清洁肠道方面同样有效,且不良事件发生率相当;此外,就有效清洁肠道而言,分次给药可能优于前一天给药。不过,SPMC 制剂似乎更容易被接受,能提高依从性,并减少鼻胃管的使用。
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
Effectiveness and safety of polyethylene-glycol-4000 versus sodium picosulphate plus magnesium oxide and citric acid for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy in children: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Colonoscopy is performed for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The quality of colonoscopy depends on adequate bowel cleansing. However, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation in children. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability profile of polyethylene glycol (PEG) compared with those of sodium picosulfate (SPMC) in children. The primary sources of the reviewed studies were Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. The databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing PEG 4000 to SPMC as a bowel cleansing solution. Six studies were included. The analysis showed that both PEG and SPMC are effective for bowel cleansing, while a split-dose regimen may be preferable to a day-before one. There were no differences between the two groups regarding adverse events such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating, and anal discomfort. Additionally, preparation with SPMC was preferred in terms of acceptability and compliance. Still, the need to place a nasogastric tube was significantly lower in the SPMC group compared to the PEG group and in the split dose regimen compared to the day before. In conclusion, PEG and SPMC are equally effective in obtaining an adequate bowel cleansing with a comparable adverse event rate; moreover, split-dose administration may be preferable to day-before one in terms of effective bowel cleansing. However, SPMC preparation is more acceptable seems to result in higher compliance, and to reduce the use of a nasogastric tube, that we encounter daily in clinical practice, is perceived as a stressful experience for children and their families.

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
5.30
自引率
13.80%
发文量
467
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: ​The Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition (JPGN) provides a forum for original papers and reviews dealing with pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition, including normal and abnormal functions of the alimentary tract and its associated organs, including the salivary glands, pancreas, gallbladder, and liver. Particular emphasis is on development and its relation to infant and childhood nutrition.
期刊最新文献
Factors associated with Helicobacter pylori antimicrobial resistance in a US pediatric cohort. Prospective association between food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis in infancy and constipation after age 3. The relationship between adverse childhood experiences and disorders of the gut-brain interaction. Serum adropin is unaltered in adolescents with histology-confirmed steatotic liver disease. Dihydroxyacetone phosphate is a novel predictor of hepatic fibrosis in Latino adolescents with obesity.
×
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