Hyponatremia and sodium picosulfate bowel preparations in older adults

Optimizing bowel preparation quality for colonoscopy: consensus recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

This document is an update to the 2014 recommendations for optimizing the adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The US Multi-Society Task Force developed consensus statements and key clinical concepts addressing important aspects of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The majority of consensus statements focus on individuals at average risk for inadequate bowel preparation. However, statements addressing individuals at risk for inadequate bowel preparation quality are also provided. The quality of a bowel preparation is defined as adequate when standard screening or surveillance intervals can be assigned based on the findings of the colonoscopy. We recommend the use of a split-dose bowel preparation regimen and suggest that a 2 L regimen may be sufficient. A same-day regimen is recommended as an acceptable alternative for individuals undergoing afternoon colonoscopy, but we suggest that a same-day regimen is an inferior alternative for individuals undergoing morning colonoscopy. We recommend limiting dietary restrictions to the day before a colonoscopy, relying on either clear liquids or low-fiber/low-residue diets for the early and midday meals. We suggest the adjunctive use of oral simethicone for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Routine tracking of the rate of adequate bowel preparations at the level of individual endoscopists and at the level of the endoscopy unit is also recommended, with a target of >90% for both rates.

Optimizing Bowel Preparation Quality for Colonoscopy: Consensus Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

This document is an update to the 2014 recommendations for optimizing the adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The US Multi-Society Task Force developed consensus statements and key clinical concepts addressing important aspects of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The majority of consensus statements focus on individuals at average risk for inadequate bowel preparation. However, statements addressing individuals at risk for inadequate bowel preparation quality are also provided. The quality of a bowel preparation is defined as adequate when standard screening or surveillance intervals can be assigned based on the findings of the colonoscopy. We recommend the use of a split-dose bowel preparation regimen and suggest that a 2 L regimen may be sufficient. A same-day regimen is recommended as an acceptable alternative for individuals undergoing afternoon colonoscopy, but we suggest that a same-day regimen is an inferior alternative for individuals undergoing morning colonoscopy. We recommend limiting dietary restrictions to the day before a colonoscopy, relying on either clear liquids or low-fiber/low-residue diets for the early and midday meals. We suggest the adjunctive use of oral simethicone for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Routine tracking of the rate of adequate bowel preparations at the level of individual endoscopists and at the level of the endoscopy unit is also recommended, with a target of >90% for both rates.

Optimizing Bowel Preparation Quality for Colonoscopy: Consensus Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer

This document is an update to the 2014 recommendations for optimizing the adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, which represents the American College of Gastroenterology and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The US Multi-Society Task Force developed consensus statements and key clinical concepts addressing important aspects of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The majority of consensus statements focus on individuals at average risk for inadequate bowel preparation. However, statements addressing individuals at risk for inadequate bowel preparation quality are also provided. The quality of a bowel preparation is defined as adequate when standard screening or surveillance intervals can be assigned based on the findings of the colonoscopy. We recommend the use of a split-dose bowel preparation regimen and suggest that a 2 L regimen may be sufficient. A same-day regimen is recommended as an acceptable alternative for individuals undergoing afternoon colonoscopy, but we suggest that a same-day regimen is an inferior alternative for individuals undergoing morning colonoscopy. We recommend limiting dietary restrictions to the day before a colonoscopy, relying on either clear liquids or low-fiber/low-residue diets for the early and midday meals. We suggest the adjunctive use of oral simethicone for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Routine tracking of the rate of adequate bowel preparations at the level of individual endoscopists and at the level of the endoscopy unit is also recommended, with a target of >90% for both rates.

Risks, indications and technical aspects of colonoscopy in elderly or frail patients. Position paper of the Societat Catalana de Digestologia, the Societat Catalana de Geriatria i Gerontologia and the Societat Catalana de Medicina de Familia i Comunitaria

Colonoscopy (CS) is an invasive diagnostic and therapeutic technique, allowing the study of the colon. It is a safe and well tolerated procedure. However, CS is associated with an increased risk of adverse events, insufficient preparation and incomplete examinations in the elderly or frail patient (PEA/F). The objective of this position paper was to develop a set of recommendations on risk assessment, indications and special care required for CS in the PEA/F. It was drafted by a group of experts appointed by the SCD, SCGiG and CAMFiC that agreed on eight statements and recommendations, between them to recommend against performing CS in patients with advanced frailty, to indicate CS only if the benefits clearly outweigh the risks in moderate frailty and to avoid repeating CS in patients with a previous normal procedure. We also recommended against performing screening CS in patients with moderate or advanced frailty.

Randomized clinical trial evaluating three low-volume preparations for colonoscopy in outpatients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: the EII-PREP trial

BACKGROUND

Data regarding bowel preparation in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) are scarce.

AIM

To compare efficacy, safety, and tolerability of low-volume preparations in patients with IBD.

METHODS

Single-center, randomized, prescriber, and colonoscopist-blinded clinical trial. IBD outpatients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 1 Liter-polyethylene glycol-ascorbate (1L-PEG), 2 Liters-PEG, or sodium picosulfate (SP). The primary endpoint was percentage of quality cleansing assessed via the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS ≥6, segments ≥2). Secondary endpoints were total high quality cleansing (BBPS 8 or 9), high-quality segmental BBPS (≥2), and patients' tolerability, symptoms, and satisfaction, assessed by questionnaires. Safety was monitored by adverse event reporting, laboratory evaluation at colonoscopy, and telephonic follow-up.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients were included (33 1L-PEG, 28 2L-PEG, and 31 SP). No significant differences between preparations were observed in quality or high-quality total BBPS or high-quality segmental BBPS. Complete intake of the solution was higher for SP (p = 0.006) and lower for 1L-PEG (p = 0.02) compared to 2L-PEG intake (p = 0.55). Clinically irrelevant hyponatremia was higher in the SP group (p < 0.0001). SP instructions were easier to understand from patient's point of view (p = 0.01). Willingness to retake was higher with SP (p < 0.0001) and less for 1L-PEG (p < 0.0001). No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no differences in efficacy between low-volume preparations in patients with IBD. Complete intake was higher for SP and lower for 1L-PEG. SP and 2L-PEG instructions were better understood and graded, and SP was more likely to be retaken. Willingness to retake was lower for 1L-PEG. No serious adverse events were reported.

SUMMARY

No differences in terms of efficacy were regarded in this clinical trial comparing low-volume preparations for colonoscopy in patients with IBD: however, Sodium Pisoculfate is better tolerated and accepted from patient's point of view. No serious adverse events were reported.

[Hyponatremic Seizure after Ingestion of an Oral Sulfate Tablet for Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy]

The oral sulfate tablet (OST), commercially available as Orafang^® (Pharmbio Korea Co., Seoul, Korea) in Korea, is being used increasingly because of its bowel-cleansing efficacy, safety, and tolerability in adults undergoing colonoscopy. Other bowel cleansing agents, such as polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate, can cause plasma volume depletion and electrolyte disturbances, such as hyponatremia. On the other hand, the OST has never been reported to cause hyponatremia in Korea. To our knowledge, the authors experienced the first case of hyponatremic seizure in an 81-year-old woman to whom an OST was administered for bowel preparation before a colonoscopy. After ingesting the OST, she presented with seizure, confusion, and dyspnea. Upon arrival, her serum sodium level was 120 mEq/L, and the urine osmolality and sodium levels were 449 mOsm/kg and 253 mOsm/kg, respectively; chest imaging suggested pulmonary edema. The associated symptoms disappeared following treatment with an intravenous injection of normal saline and 3% NaCl to normalize the sodium level. This case shows that the OST can cause hyponatremia and other severe complications related to hyponatremia.

Comparison of Two Types of 1-L Polyethylene Glycol-ascorbic Acid as Colonoscopic Bowel Preparation: A Prospective Randomized Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recently, 1-L polyethylene glycol-ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc) has been used to reduce the volume of preparation agents in colonoscopy. This clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of two types of 1-L PEG-Asc (CleanViewAL^® [Tae Joon Pharmaceutical Company, Seoul, Korea] and Plenvu^® [Norgine, Harefield, United Kingdom]) in average-aged adults.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 4 clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the efficacy evaluated using the Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS), and the secondary endpoint was clinical safety.

RESULTS

In total, 173 patients were assigned to either the CleanViewAL^® (n=84) or Plenvu^® (n=89) group. Overall cleansing successes of 97.6% (82/84) and 98.8% (88/89) were achieved in the CleanViewAL^® group and in the Plenvu^® group, respectively, showing that CleanViewAL^® has similar bowel cleansing efficacy to Plenvu^® (95% CI, -0.052 to 0.027; p=0.207). The total BBPS score was 8.67±1.00 and 8.70±0.76 in the CleanViewAL^® group and Plenvu^® group, respectively (p=0.869). The most common adverse symptom was nausea, and no adverse symptoms requiring hospitalization were reported in either group. There were no cases of critical hypernatremia and liver dysfunction exceeding the common terminology criteria for adverse events grade I. An overall satisfaction score (scale of 1 to 10) showed no difference between the two groups (p=0.289). However, the CleanViewAL^® group showed a higher taste satisfaction score (scale of 1 to 5) than the Plenvu^® group (CleanViewAL^®: 2.90±0.91, Plenvu^®: 2.60±0.86, p=0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

Both types of 1-L PEG-Asc, CleanViewAL^® and Plenvu^®, are effective and safe bowel cleansing agents in average-aged adults. CleanViewAL^® was preferred in terms of taste satisfaction.

From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s

Colonoscopy represents the most widespread and effective tool for the prevention and treatment of early stage preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in the panorama of cancer screening. In the world there are different approaches to the topic of colorectal cancer prevention and screening: different starting ages (45-50 years); different initial screening tools such as fecal occult blood with immunohistochemical or immune-enzymatic tests; recto-sigmoidoscopy; and colonoscopy. The key aspects of this scenario are composed of a proper bowel preparation that ensures a valid diagnostic examination, experienced endoscopist in detection of preneoplastic and early neoplastic lesions and open-minded to upcoming artificial intelligence-aided examination, knowledge in the field of resection of these lesions (from cold-snaring, through endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection, up to advanced tools), and management of complications.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of a split-dose bowel cleansing regimen of magnesium citrate with sodium picosulfate - a phase IV clinical observational study

BACKGROUND

There are contradictory results about the effect of magnesium citrate plus sodium picosulfate bowel cleansing agents on the fluid and electrolyte balance. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the efficacy, tolerability and safety of this medication in colonoscopy preparation.

METHODS

233 patients were enrolled in this phase IV prospective observational study. The effectiveness of bowel cleansing was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Adequate cleansing was defined as BBPS ≥ 6 and excellent cleansing as BBPS > 7. Tolerability was examined using a standardized questionnaire. In the safety analysis, the change of serum electrolytes levels and renal function during bowel cleansing was assessed.

RESULTS

Adequate and excellent bowel cleansing were achieved 94.85% and 72.96% of cases, respectively. None or very mild symptoms were reported in 47.21% of cases. Statistically significant changes occurred in serum potassium (4.38±0.43 vs. 4.25±0.43 mmol/L, p<0.0001), urea (4.86±1.37 vs. 3.84±1.43 mmol/L, p<0.0001) and creatinine (male: 81.07±16.02 vs. 84.54±15.11 μmol/L; female: 69.32±12.22 vs. 72.96±12.11 μmol/L, p<0.0001) levels during the colonoscopy preparation. However, the number of patients with values outside of the normal range increased significantly only in the case of serum urea (3.95% vs. 26.97%, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Magnesium citrate with sodium picosulfate is outstandingly effective, well tolerated and a safe agent in colonoscopy preparation. It caused significant, but non-clinically relevant changes in serum electrolytes levels and renal function.

Symptomatic Hyponatremia following Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Case Report

Colonoscopy is considered a gold standard tool for the diagnostic evaluation of colorectal diseases. Bowel preparation, a pre-requisite for colonoscopy, usually involves ingestion of purgatives for the cleansing of the bowel so that visualization is not obscured during the procedure. Commonly used preparations are sodium phosphate-based solutions, sodium picosulphate and polyethylene glycol. The use of such preparations is associated with electrolyte disturbances, commonly hyponatremia. Hyponatremia is usually seen with sodium phosphate based solutions and is rare with polyethylene glycol. Symptomatic hyponatremia, however, is rare following bowel preparation and is attributable to other factors as well, such as the age of patient, non-osmotic release of antidiuretic hormone and the procedure itself. In this report, we discuss a case of severe symptomatic hyponatremia observed in a 71-year-old gentleman who underwent polyethylene glycol based bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Frequency of hyponatremia caused by sodium picosulfate solution when used as a bowel cleansing agent for colonoscopy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of hyponatremia in patients taking Sodium Picosulfate Solution (SPS) solution for bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy and to compare serum sodium levels before and after SPS.

METHODS

This interventional study was conducted at Dr. Ruth K. M. Pfau, Civil Hospital Karachi between June 2019 to November 2019. Patients undergoing colonoscopy were included in the study. All patients were given SPS. Two samples of blood for electrolytes were taken, one 30 minutes before taking SPS solution and another 30 minutes before colonoscopy. Paired sample t-test was used to determine the difference between serum sodium level before taking the colonoscopy solution and serum sodium level before colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Fifty- four patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were included. Out of the 54 patients 28 (51.9%) were males and 26 (48.1%) were females. Mean sodium levels before taking colonoscopy solution was 139.7 ±3.5 mEq/L and mean sodium level before colonoscopy was 138.9 ±3.8 mEq/L. The difference between serum sodium level before taking SPS colonoscopy solution and before colonoscopy was found to be statistically insignificant (t (53) = 1.308; p = 0.196).

CONCLUSION

No serious adverse effects were reported in any of our patients. There was no significant difference in the serum sodium level of patients undergoing colonoscopy before taking SPS bowel preparation solution and serum sodium level before colonoscopy.

Efficacy and Patient Tolerability of Split-Dose Sodium Picosulfate/Magnesium Citrate (SPMC) Oral Solution Compared to the Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Solution for Bowel Preparation in Outpatient Colonoscopy: An Evidence-Based Review

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the gold standard exam for evaluation of colonic abnormalities and for screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer. However, the efficacy of colonoscopy is dependent on the quality of the pre-colonoscopy bowel preparation. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) have emerged as two of the most commonly used bowel preparation agents. We conducted an evidence-based review of current evidence to further investigate the efficacy and patient tolerability of split-dose SPMC oral solution compared to PEG solution for colonoscopy bowel preparation.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed using Pubmed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. All studies on split-dose bowel preparation with SPMC and PEG were reviewed. Relevant studies regarding colonoscopy and bowel preparations were also included. Randomized controlled trials were prioritized due to the high quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials were included. Split-dose SPMC and PEG were associated with similar results for adequacy of bowel preparation. Split-dose SPMC was associated with increased patient tolerability and compliance.

CONCLUSION

Split-dose SPMC and PEG are both adequate and safe for bowel preparation for outpatient colonoscopy, with split-dose SPMC being more tolerable for patients. Additional RCTs comparing these and other bowel preparation solutions are necessary to further investigate quality of bowel preparation, patient preference, and cost-effectiveness of the various options.

New Ultra Low Volume Bowel Preparation and Overview of Existing Bowel Preparations

BACKGROUND

Adequate bowel cleansing is essential in achieving a good quality colonoscopy. However, one of the barriers to achieving high-quality bowel cleansing is the patient's tolerability. Different bowel preparations have been developed to improve tolerability while maintaining adequate bowel cleansing.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to explore the pros and cons of commonly used bowel preparations, particularly highlighting the new ultra-low volume bowel preparation.

METHODS

Extensive literature search was carried out on various databases to evaluate the effectiveness and side effects of different bowel cleansing agents, including findings of recent clinical trials on ultra-low bowel preparation.

RESULTS

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been commonly used as a bowel prep. Due to its high volume required to ingest to achieve an adequate effect, it has been combined with various adjuncts to reduce the volume to make it more tolerable. Magnesium and phosphate-based preps can achieve low volume, but they can be associated with multiple side effects, mainly electrolyte disturbances. Ultra low volume prep (NER1006) was achieved by combing PEG with ascorbic acid, and its efficacy and side effects were demonstrated in three noninferiority studies.

CONCLUSION

It is important to consider patient preferences, co-morbidities and tolerability, and efficacy and side effect profiles when choosing bowel prep for patients undergoing colonoscopy. New ultra-low bowel prep showed promising results in initial clinical trials, but further real-world post-marketing data will inform its value in clinical practice.

Colonoscopy adverse events: are we getting the full picture?

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy adverse events (AEs) are commonly underreported and standardised reporting is rarely used. We aimed to investigate AEs associated with colonoscopy in a real world setting, using the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) lexicon.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of AEs related to outpatient colonoscopies performed in the North Denmark Region from 2015 to 2018 identified AEs from readmission within eight days or death within 30 days of colonoscopy. AEs were investigated in electronic health records and categorised, attributed and graded according to the ASGE lexicon.

RESULTS

Of 49,445 colonoscopies performed, 1141 were potentially associated with AEs (23.07‰). Electronic health record review left 489 AEs attributed to colonoscopy (9.9‰); categorised as cardiovascular (0.65‰), pulmonary (0.36‰), thromboembolic (0.10‰), instrumental incl. perforations (0.99‰), bleeding (3.07‰), infection (0.87‰), drug reactions (0.04‰), pain (2.00‰), integument (damage to skin/bones) (0.34‰) and other (1.62‰) AEs. Ten (0.20‰) AEs were fatal, but only one was procedure related (perforation). All shearing force perforations occurred in the sigmoid colon. Most polypectomy perforations occurred in the caecum (60%).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy carries important procedure and non-procedure related risks. Non-procedure related AEs are likely underreported. Better attention to patients with pre-existing diseases and further colonoscopist training may lower AE rates. A standardised colonoscopy AE reporting system is warranted.

Bowel preparation agent inducing profound shock precolonoscopy

A 73-year-old woman was admitted to the intensive care unit following vomiting and diarrhoea onset after completing oral bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy to investigate haematochezia. She had a history of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Crohn's disease, diverticular disease, hypertension and dyslipidaemia. She was resuscitated with intravenous fluids, antibiotics and required epinephrine, norepinephrine and vasopressin infusions. She improved over her 4-day intensive care admission and was discharged to the general medical ward, but ultimately died 19 days after presentation.

A Randomized, Endoscopist-Blinded, Prospective Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Patient Tolerability between Bowel Preparation Protocols Using Sodium Picosulfate Magnesium Citrate and Polyethylene-Glycol (1 L and 2 L) for Colonoscopy

Patient compliance during bowel preparation is important for successful colonoscopy. Bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol (PEG), the most commonly used solution for cleansing, involves the unpleasant ingestion of a large amount of liquid. Sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SP-MC) solution is an alternative option with better palatability than PEG. Therefore, in this study, we compared the efficacy and patient tolerability among the following three bowel preparation protocols: 2 L PEG-ascorbic acid (ASc), 1 L PEG-ASc plus bisacodyl, and SP-MC 340 mL plus bisacodyl. We conducted a randomized prospective endoscopist-blinded study between August 2018 and January 2019. A total of 311 patients were randomly classified into three groups according to the above-described bowel preparation protocols. To evaluate the efficacy of bowel cleansing, we used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. The degree of symptoms and the patients' satisfaction with each bowel preparation method were investigated using a questionnaire completed before sedation for colonoscopy. The baseline characteristics were similar among the three groups. There was no significant difference in the bowel preparation quality among the three groups. However, the incidence of symptoms, such as abdominal fullness and pain, was significantly lower (P = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively) while the patients' satisfaction rate was significantly higher (P = 0.012) in the SP-MC plus bisacodyl group than in the two PEG groups. In this study, the efficacy of the SP-MC plus bisacodyl solution was similar to that of the PEG solutions. However, patient tolerability and satisfaction were better in the SP-MC plus bisacodyl group than in the other groups. In conclusion, the use of SP-MC plus bisacodyl bowel preparation solution might be a better method for providing good intestinal cleansing and improving patient compliance.

Severe symptomatic hyponatraemia secondary to bowel preparation

​A 62-year-old woman presented to a rural Australian hospital for a planned admission to receive bowel preparation 1 day prior to an upper endoscopy and colonoscopy. This admission was complicated by seizures and reduced levels of consciousness in the setting of hyponatraemia secondary to bowel preparation. Given the limited resources in a remote/rural Australian hospital, transfer to a tertiary level hospital was required for review and management of this rare complication of bowel preparation.

Antihyperglycemic therapy during colonoscopy preparation: A review and suggestions for practical recommendations

Patients with diabetes have distinct risks during precolonoscopy bowel preparation, caused by change of diet, change of antihyperglycemic medication regimens and diabetes-related complications and comorbidities. These risks include hypoglycemia, water and electrolyte imbalance, acute renal failure, lactic acidosis, ketoacidosis and low quality of bowel preparation. Here we review the existing literature and present recommendations from a subcommittee of the Israeli National Diabetes Council for primary care physicians and gastroenterologists. The instructions include general suggestions on diet and glucose monitoring and specific recommendations on timing of modification or cessation of each of the antihyperglycemic medication types to ensure patient safety during bowel preparation.

Severe hyponatremia secondary to preparation for colonoscopy with sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate

The number of colonoscopies performed in Spain has been progressively increasing in recent years with the program of early detection of colon cancer. The preparation for this test is the key to greater profitability and the choice of the solution to be administered, decisive. The adverse effects that we can observe; usually are mild, but they can entail other more serious ones, like electrolytic imbalances as we present in this case.

Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate factors contributing to poor bowel preparation in patients undergoing colonoscopy procedures. We used a reproducible search strategy to identify studies, searching 10 medical databases, including PubMed, Ovid, Medline, and Cochrane Library Database for reports published between 2000 and 2016. Fully published studies, evaluating risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation, were included. Two reviewers independently scored the identified studies for methodology and abstracted pertinent data. Pooling was conducted with both fixed-effects and random-effects models; results were presented from the random effects model when heterogeneity was significant. Odds ratios (OR) estimates with 95% confidence interval were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed by I statistics. Twenty-four studies with a total of 49 868 patients met the inclusion criteria. Age (OR: -1.20), male sex (OR: 0.85), inpatient status (OR: 0.57), diabetes mellitus (OR: 0.58), hypertension (OR: 0.58), cirrhosis (OR: 0.49), narcotic use (OR: 0.59), constipation (OR: 0.61), stroke (OR; 0.51), and tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) use (0.51), were associated with inadequate bowel preparation. In our sensitivity analysis comparing Western and Asian countries, we found that diabetes, cirrhosis, male sex, history of stroke and TCA use were stronger risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation in Western countries than in Asian countries. We also found that history of stroke, TCA use, and race were risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation in patients receiving conventional bowel preparation compared with those receiving split-dose bowel preparation. Multiple risk factors affect the quality of bowel preparation and specific risk factors can be intervened upon, in different populations, to optimize preparation.

Split-dose bowel cleansing with picosulphate is safe and better tolerated than 2-l polyethylene glycol solution

BACKGROUND

In physically less fit patients and patients requiring repeated exams, adequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy remains problematic, particularly because patients need to drink large volumes of unpleasant-tasting fluids. A further concern is potential unwarranted fluid shifts.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the safety and burden of a small-volume sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate preparation (SPS-MC) with a 2-l ascorbic-acid-enriched polyethylene glycol solution plus bisacodyl pretreatment (PEG-Asc+B).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients referred for colonoscopy were randomized to SPS-MC or PEG-Asc+B administered as a split-dose regimen. Patients received advice on the recommended 4-l SPS-MC and 2-l PEG-Asc+B fluid intake. Safety was assessed by blood sampling before and after the preparation and during a 30-day follow-up period. A questionnaire assessed tolerability and perceived burden of the preparation.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients underwent colonoscopy. Blood sampling showed a slight but significant decrease in sodium, chloride and osmolality and increase in magnesium in the SPS-MC group and a decrease in bicarbonate in the PEG-Asc+B group. Hyponatraemia and hypermagnesaemia without clinical signs were observed in 16 (14 SPS-MC) and 13 SPS-MC patients, respectively. Patients reported significantly fewer physical complaints and a significantly higher completion rate with SPS-MC. Patients receiving SPS-MC rated the intake as being easier and better tasting. In the event of a repeat colonoscopy, 59.7% of patients in the PEG-Asc+B and 93.6% of patients in the SPS-MC group would opt for the same preparation again.

CONCLUSION

Despite electrolyte shifts, both SPS-MC and PEG-Asc+B appeared clinically safe. From a patient's perspective, a small-volume preparation formula such as SPS-MC is preferred, resulting in fewer physical complaints and greater ease of intake.

Prevalence of hypokalemia before and after bowel preparation for colonoscopy in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Bowel preparation for colonoscopy should not cause significant shifts in systemic electrolyte concentrations. We recently encountered 2 cases of severe postcolonoscopy hypokalemia with fatal consequences, prompting us to conduct a study to explore the magnitude of and risk factors for hypokalemia associated with bowel preparation. We paid specific attention to higher-risk subgroups, in particular, diuretic users, hospitalized patients, and patients estimated to be at high risk by the gastroenterologist.

METHODS

From January 1 to December 31, 2014, we included all patients at risk for hypokalemia (diuretic users, hospitalized patients, and patients estimated at high risk by the gastroenterologist) who underwent colonoscopy at our institution. We measured serum potassium levels before low-volume polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for colonoscopy. In a subset of patients who had normal serum potassium levels before bowel cleansing, serum potassium levels after bowel cleansing also were measured.

RESULTS

In total, 5515 colonoscopies were performed, including 1822 procedures in diuretic users or hospitalized patients. Of these, 77 (4.2%) patients had hypokalemia before bowel cleansing. A logistic regression model showed that hospitalized patients were more likely to have hypokalemia than non-hospitalized patients. 301 patients with normal potassium levels had potassium controls after bowel cleansing, of whom 71 (23.6%) developed hypokalemia. A logistic regression model showed that diuretic users were more likely to develop hypokalemia than those who did not use diuretics.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypokalemia is frequently encountered after low-volume polyethylene glycol bowel cleansing in high-risk patients. Additional large-scale studies are needed on the prevalence of hypokalemia in unselected populations undergoing bowel cleansing and on the occurrence of potentially very serious side effects in order to decide on screening of high-risk groups in daily clinical practice. (Clinical trial registration number: NTR5400.).

White Diet with split-dose Picosalax is preferred, better tolerated, and non-inferior to day-before clear fluids with polyethylene glycol plus sodium picosulfate-magnesium citrate for morning colonoscopy: A randomized, non-inferiority trial

Background and Aim

Bowel preparations with polyethylene glycol (PEG) and clear fluids are often poorly tolerated. We compared an innovative low‐residue White Diet and low‐volume, split‐dose Picosalax with the standard preparation at our institution of day‐before clear fluids and combination PEG plus sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC).

Methods

Adults undergoing morning colonoscopy were randomized to either the White Diet and split‐dose, two sachets of Picosalax (WD/PICO) or day‐before clear fluids and 1‐L PEG plus two sachets of SPMC (CF/PEG + SPMC). The primary endpoint was successful bowel preparation defined by an Ottawa bowel preparation score ≤ 6. An intention‐to‐treat analysis with a predefined non‐inferiority margin of 15% was used to compare efficacy.

Results

A total of 250 patients were randomized (125 WD/PICO and 125 CF/PEG + SPMC). WD/PICO was non‐inferior to CF/PEG + SPMC for successful bowel preparation by intention‐to‐treat analysis (58% WD/PICO vs 62% CF/PEG + SPMC, 95%CI: −14.2 to 6.2%) and per‐protocol analysis (64% WD/PICO vs 65% CF/PEG + SPMC, 95%CI: −11.3 to 9.4%). Patients in the WD/PICO group reported greater satisfaction with the diet (P < 0.001), greater ease of following the diet (P < 0.001), and improved experience compared with prior colonoscopy (P < 0.0001), less bloating (P = 0.02), less weakness (P = 0.046), less hunger (P < 0.0001), and less interference with daily activities (P = 0.001). Procedure/withdrawal times and adenoma detection rates were similar between groups.

Conclusion

Bowel preparation with the White Diet and low‐volume, split‐dose Picosalax was preferred and better tolerated without detriment to bowel preparation success compared with clear fluids and combination PEG plus SPMC for morning colonoscopy.

Comparison of claims data on hospitalization rates and repeat procedures in patients receiving a bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate outcomes of colorectal screening using sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate compared with other prescription bowel-preparation agents. Primary endpoints were rates of procedure-associated hospitalizations, diagnosis at hospitalization, and rates of early repeat screenings.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients using the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan databases, which contain fully adjudicated, de-identified, medical- and prescription-drug claims, as well as demographic and enrollment information for individuals with commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare supplemental insurance coverage. Patients who had a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy over a 3-year period were identified using International Classification of Diseases Clinical Modification procedure codes, recorded on claims from physicians and facilities. First, screening colonoscopy was identified for each patient, and the study was limited to those patients who could be observed for ≥6 months before and 3 months after the screening procedure. Total number of hospitalizations and rates of early repeat screenings were evaluated for all patients who received sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate and compared with those who received other bowel-preparation agents. Individual prescription medications that could affect the outcome of the cleansing agent were identified; further evaluations were made to establish whether patients had comorbid conditions, such as chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, or psychiatric illness. Statistical methods included descriptive statistics, two-tailed t-tests, and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 566,628 procedures were identified in the MarketScan databases and included in the study. Sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate performed well in terms of safety outcomes, with no hospitalizations due to diagnosis of hyponatremia, dehydration, or other fluid disorders in the 10 days after procedure. Early repeat rates among sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate patients were comparable with rates observed for all other cleansing agents.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of colorectal screening using sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate were not significantly different compared with other prescription bowel-preparation agents.

Enhanced instructions improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The success of a colonoscopy is highly dependent on the quality of bowel preparation (BP). Many patients have poor BP due to non-compliance with regular instructions. Reports concerning the effects of enhanced instructions on BP quality are inconsistent. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare BP quality between patients receiving enhanced instructions in addition to regular instructions and those who received regular instructions only.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies published for August 2015. The quality of BP (adequate/inadequate), adenoma detection rate, polyp detection rate, willingness to repeat preparation, and adverse events were estimated by using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with random effects models.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials (n = 3795) were included. Patients who received enhanced instructions showed significantly better BP quality than those receiving only regular instructions (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.65-3.35; P < .001). Subgroup analysis showed that the beneficial effects of enhanced instructions on BP quality were consistent among patients receiving different purgative types, administration methods, or diet restriction (all P < .05). Patients in the enhanced instructions group showed more willingness to repeat the preparation (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.20-3.04; P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced instructions significantly improved the quality of BP and willingness to repeat the preparation in patients undergoing colonoscopy. Factors related to patient instructions appear to be as important as the preparation method itself in improving BP quality.

Second-Generation Antidepressants and Hyponatremia Risk: A Population-Based Cohort Study of Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Hyponatremia may occur after initiation of a second-generation antidepressant drug. However, the magnitude of this risk among older adults in routine care is not well characterized.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, population-based, matched-cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

In Ontario, Canada, 2003 to 2012, we compared older adults with a mood or anxiety disorder who were dispensed 1 of 9 second-generation antidepressant drugs with matched adults with comparable indicators of baseline health who were not dispensed an antidepressant drug (n=138,246 per group). A similar comparison was made in a subpopulation with available laboratory data (n=4,186 per group).

PREDICTOR

Second-generation antidepressant prescription versus no antidepressant prescription.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was hospitalization with hyponatremia. A secondary outcome was hospitalization with both hyponatremia and delirium.

MEASUREMENTS

We assessed hospitalization with hyponatremia using a diagnosis code and, in the subpopulation, serum sodium values. We assessed hospitalization with hyponatremia and delirium using a combination of diagnosis codes.

RESULTS

Second-generation antidepressant use versus nonuse was associated with higher 30-day risk for hospitalization with hyponatremia (450/138,246 [0.33%] vs 84/138,246 [0.06%]; relative risk [RR], 5.46 [95% CI, 4.32-6.91]). This association was consistent in the subpopulation with serum sodium values (73/4,186 [1.74%] vs 18/4,186 [0.43%]; RR, 4.23 [95% CI, 2.50-7.19]; absolute risk increase, 1.31% [95% CI, 0.87%-1.75%]). Second-generation antidepressant use versus nonuse was also associated with higher 30-day risk for hospitalization with both hyponatremia and delirium (28/138,246 [0.02%] vs 7/138,246 [0.005%]; RR, 4.00 [95% CI, 1.75-9.16]).

LIMITATIONS

Measures of serum sodium could be ascertained in only a subpopulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a second-generation antidepressant in routine care by older adults is associated with an approximate 5-fold increase in 30-day risk for hospitalization with hyponatremia compared to nonuse. However, the absolute increase in 30-day incidence is low.

Atypical antipsychotic medications and hyponatremia in older adults: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

A number of case reports have suggested a possible association between atypical antipsychotic medications and hyponatremia. Currently, there are no reliable estimates of hyponatremia risk from atypical antipsychotic drugs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the 30-day risk of hospitalization with hyponatremia in older adults dispensed an atypical antipsychotic drug relative to no antipsychotic use.

DESIGN

The design of this study was a retrospective, population-based cohort study.

SETTING

The setting of this study was in Ontario, Canada, from 2003 to 2012.

PATIENTS

Adults 65 years or older with an identified psychiatric condition who were newly dispensed risperidone, olanzapine, or quetiapine in the community setting compared to adults with similar indicators of baseline health who were not dispensed such a prescription.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the 30-day risk of hospitalization with hyponatremia. The tracer outcome (an outcome that is not expected to be influenced by the study drugs) was the 30-day risk of hospitalization with bowel obstruction. These outcomes were assessed using hospital diagnosis codes.

METHODS

Using health administrative data, we applied a propensity score technique to match antipsychotic users 1:1 to non-users of antipsychotic drugs (58,008 patients in each group). We used conditional logistic regression to compare outcomes among the matched users and non-users.

RESULTS

A total of 104 baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two matched groups. Atypical antipsychotic use compared to non-use was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization with hyponatremia within 30 days (86/58,008 (0.15 %) versus 53/58,008 (0.09 %); relative risk 1.62 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 2.29); absolute risk increase 0.06 % (95 % CI 0.02 to 0.10)). The limited number of events precluded some additional analyses to confirm if the association was robust. Atypical antipsychotic use compared to non-use was not associated with hospitalization with bowel obstruction within 30 days (55/58,008 (0.09 %) versus 44/58,008 (0.08 %); relative risk 1.25 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.86)).

LIMITATIONS

We could only study older adults within our data sources.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the use of an atypical antipsychotic was associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in the 30-day risk of a hospitalization with hyponatremia. The association was less pronounced than that described with other psychotropic drugs.

Optimizing bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a guide to enhance quality of visualization

Colonoscopy is an important screening and therapeutic modality for colorectal cancer. Unlike other screening tests, colonoscopy is dependent on pre-procedure bowel preparation. If the bowel preparation is poor, significant pathology may be missed. Many factors are known to improve bowel preparation. This review will highlight those factors that may optimize the bowel preparation, including choice of bowel preparation, grading or scoring of the bowel preparation, special factors that influence preparation, and diet prior to colonoscopy that affects bowel preparation. The aim of the review is to offer suggestions and guide endoscopists on how to optimize the bowel preparation for the patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Bowel cleansing before colonoscopy: Balancing efficacy, safety, cost and patient tolerance

Effective colorectal cancer screening relies on reliable colonoscopy findings which are themselves dependent on adequate bowel cleansing. Research has consistently demonstrated that inadequate bowel preparation adversely affects the adenoma detection rate and leads gastroenterologists to recommend earlier follow up than is consistent with published guidelines. Poor preparation affects as many as 30% of colonoscopies and contributes to an increased cost of colonoscopies. Patient tolerability is strongly affected by the preparation chosen and manner in which it is administered. Poor tolerability is, in turn, associated with lower quality bowel preparations. Recently, several new developments in both agents being used for bowel preparation and in the timing of administration have brought endoscopists closer to achieving the goal of effective, reliable, safe, and tolerable regimens. Historically, large volume preparations given in a single dose were administered to patients in order to achieve adequate bowel cleansing. These were poorly tolerated, and the unpleasant taste of and significant side effects produced by these large volume regimens contributed significantly to patients’ inability to reliably complete the preparation and to a reluctance to repeat the procedure. Smaller volumes, including preparations that are administered as tablets to be consumed with water, given as split doses have significantly improved both the patient experience and efficacy, and an appreciation of the importance of the preparation to colonoscopy interval have produced additional cleansing.

Single-day sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate versus split-dose polyethylene glycol for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy: A prospective randomized endoscopist-blinded trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The intake of polyethylene glycol (PEG) prior colonoscopy is frequently associated with nausea and abdominal discomfort. The aim of this study was to investigate whether sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (PMC) is superior to a polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation in regard to patient acceptance. Furthermore, it investigates possible differences in efficiency and patient safety.

METHODS

In a randomised, prospective, and endoscopist-blinded study patients were 1:1 randomized to either use PMC or 4-L PEG in order to prepare for colonoscopy. Cleansing regimes consisted of a split-dose administration in the PEG arm and standard administration in the PMC arm. Primary end point was proportion of patients evaluating the bowel preparation procedure as "very distressing," defined as ≥ 8 points on a 10-point numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary end points were quality of bowel preparation and electrolyte parameters.

RESULTS

PMC bowel-cleansing procedure was better tolerated compared with PEG (PMC(NRS<8)  = 89.9% vs PEG(NRS<8)  = 79.2%, P = 0.037). Mean declines in serum sodium (ΔSodium(PEG)  = -0.76 ± 3.07 vs ΔSodium(PMC)  = -3.38 ± 3.56 mmol/L; P < 0.001), chloride (ΔChloride(PEG)  = -1.00 ± 3.22 vs ΔChloride(PMC)  = -3.49 ± 3.51 mmol/L; P < 0.001), and osmolality (ΔOsmolality(PEG)  = -4.23 ± 6.82 vs ΔOsmolality(PMC)  = -8.83 ± 7.43 mosmol/kg; P < 0.001) were higher in the PMC arm than in the PEG arm. Hyponatremia after bowel preparation occurred more often in PMC (21.2%) than in PEG (4.0%) (P < 0.001). Successful preparation was achieved more frequently in the PEG arm (42.9% vs 82.2%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Standard picosulfate/magnesium citrate is better accepted than a split-dose PEG regimen. From the perspective of successful preparation and patients' safety, PEG is superior to PMC.

Optimizing bowel cleansing for colonoscopy

Adequate bowel cleansing is essential for complete examination of the colon mucosa during colonoscopy. Suboptimal bowel preparation has potential adverse consequences, such as missed pathologic abnormalities, the need for repeated procedures, and increased procedure-related complications. Several factors can predict individuals at increased risk for inadequate bowel preparation. If predictors of inadequate bowel preparation are identified, then education should be intensified and a more aggressive bowel regimen recommended. On completion of this article, you should be able to (1) define the frequency of inadequate colon preparations, (2) identify predictors of poor bowel preparation, and (3) use a more aggressive bowel regimen when clinically indicated.

Acute hyponatremia with seizure and mental change after oral sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate bowel preparation

Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (Picolight Powder), which is used as a bowel preparation for the colon and the rectum, can cause a severe electrolyte imbalance like hyponatremia. When hyponatremia gets severe or occurs rapidly, it can lead to death due to associated complications. We have experienced a case of hyponatremia associated with seizure and loss of consciousness in a 76-year-old woman, who took sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy. She was taking thiazide and synthroid for the treatment of hypertension and hypothyroidism, respectively, and she had other underlying medical conditions such as a history of seizure and dementia. Following the diagnosis of hyponatremia, we used an intravenous injection of 3% NaCl to normalize the sodium level in her serum, and her associated symptoms soon disappeared.

[Bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Any significant progress on the horizon?]

Colonoscopy is the method of choice for colorectal cancer screening. To be effective, screening colonoscopy must have high quality standards. The key element is the quality of the preparation. However, up to 20% of patients are inadequately prepared and, at present, anterograde washing is the least tolerated part of the procedure. In the choice of preparation, safety is a prerequisite and efficacy is a priority. Tolerance is a secondary but nevertheless influential factor in the quality of preparation and has consequently been the primary focus of many recent studies. In the last few years, a rapidly increasing number of studies have evaluated new drugs, dosages and adjuvant therapies to improve efficacy and tolerability. These studies have collaterally shown that inadequate preparation and lack of adherence to the prescribed regimen can be partially predicted, making it essential to identify this patient subgroup and invest the necessary effort in their instruction. New individualized and flexible approaches are expected for the different clinical scenarios. The search for the ideal colonoscopy preparation, which would be tolerable, safe and above all effective, remains open.

Higher dose versus lower dose of antiviral therapy in the treatment of herpes zoster infection in the elderly: a matched retrospective population-based cohort study

Background

Higher versus lower doses of antiviral drugs used to treat herpes zoster infection may lead to more adverse drug events in older adults, particularly those with chronic kidney disease.

Methods

We conducted a matched retrospective population-based cohort study of older adults (mean 77 years) in Ontario, Canada who initiated in the outpatient setting a higher (n = 23,256) or lower (n = 3,876) dose of one of three oral antivirals for the treatment of herpes zoster between 2002 and 2011. The primary outcome was hospitalization within 30 days with evidence of a computed tomography (CT) scan of the head (a proxy for acute neurotoxicity). The secondary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality.

Results

A higher compared to lower dose of antiviral drug was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization with an urgent CT scan of the head (247 [1.06%] events with higher dose versus 43 [1.11%] events with lower dose, relative risk 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.33, p-value 0.79) and was not associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (63 [0.27%] events versus 15 [0.39%] events, relative risk 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 1.23, p-value 0.21). Results were consistent in all subgroups, including those with and without chronic kidney disease.

Conclusions

Initiating a higher compared to a lower dose of an antiviral drug for the treatment of herpes zoster was not associated with an increased risk of adverse drug events. The findings support the safety of these drugs in older adults as currently prescribed in routine care.