Detailed Information on Publication Record
2021
Comparison of Four Bowel Cleansing Agents for Colonoscopy and the Factors Affecting their Efficacy. A Prospective, Randomized Study
KMOCHOVA, Klara, Tomas GREGA, Ondřej NGO, Gabriela VOJTECHOVA, Ondřej MÁJEK et. al.Basic information
Original name
Comparison of Four Bowel Cleansing Agents for Colonoscopy and the Factors Affecting their Efficacy. A Prospective, Randomized Study
Authors
KMOCHOVA, Klara (56 Belgium), Tomas GREGA (203 Czech Republic), Ondřej NGO (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Gabriela VOJTECHOVA (203 Czech Republic), Ondřej MÁJEK (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Petr URBANEK (203 Czech Republic), Miroslav ZAVORAL (203 Czech Republic) and Stepan SUCHANEK (203 Czech Republic, guarantor)
Edition
Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, CLUJ-NAPOCA, MEDICAL UNIV PRESS, 2021, 1841-8724
Other information
Language
English
Type of outcome
Článek v odborném periodiku
Field of Study
30219 Gastroenterology and hepatology
Country of publisher
Romania
Confidentiality degree
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
References:
Impact factor
Impact factor: 2.142
RIV identification code
RIV/00216224:14110/21:00120113
Organization unit
Faculty of Medicine
UT WoS
000663559800009
Keywords in English
bowel preparation; cleansing agents; colonoscopy; quality of colonoscopy; screening; polyp detection rate
Tags
International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 23/7/2021 15:00, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová
Abstract
V originále
Background & Aims: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for successful and effective colonoscopy. Several types of cleansing agents are currently available including low-volume solutions. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of four different bowel cleansing agents. Methods: A single-center, prospective, randomized, and single-blind study was performed. Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy were enrolled and randomized into one of the following types of laxatives: polyethylenglycol 4L (PEG), oral sulfate solution (OSS), 2L polyethylenglycol + ascorbate (2L-PEG/Asc), or magnesium citrate + sodium picosulfate (MCSP). The primary outcome was quality of bowel cleansing evaluated according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR) and tolerability. Results: Final analysis was performed on 431 patients. The number of patients with adequate bowel preparation (BBPS total scores >= 6 and sub scores >= 2 in each segment) was not significantly different throughout all groups (95.4% PEG; 94.6% OSS; 96.3% 2L-PEG/Asc; 96.2% MCSP; p=0.955). Excellent bowel preparation (BBPS total scores >= 8) was associated with younger age (p=0.007). The groups did not have significantly different PDRs (49.5% PEG; 49.1% OSS; 38% 2L-PEG/Asc; 40.4% MCSP; p=0.201). The strongest predictors of pathology identification were age and male gender. The best-tolerated solution was MCSP (palatability: p<0.001; nausea: p=0.024). Conclusion: All tested laxatives provided comparable efficacy in terms of bowel cleansing quality and PDR. The low-volume agent MCSP was the best tolerated.
Links
NV16-29614A, research and development project |
| ||
NV17-31909A, research and development project |
| ||
NV18-08-00246, research and development project |
|