1
|
Shen J, Sheng H, He H, Sun C, Han X, Zhu X, Wang C, Shen R, Ye Q, Yuan X, Zhao Q, Yang N, Wang J, Lu T, Chen D, Chen D, Lin J, Shao X. A randomized prospective study comparing the effect of low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy preparation in China. Scand J Gastroenterol 2024; 59:1112-1119. [PMID: 39054602 DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2024.2383276] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2024] [Revised: 07/08/2024] [Accepted: 07/17/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jianwei Shen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Hong Sheng
- Department of Gastroenterology, Xiangshan County First People's Hospital Medical Health Group, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Hui He
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Yinzhou Anorectal Hospital Co., Ltd, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Changbo Sun
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Municipal Hospital of TCM, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xufeng Han
- Second Department of Internal Medicine, Yuyao Hospital of TCM, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xianjie Zhu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ninghai County Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Chunwei Wang
- Health Science Center, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Ruiwei Shen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Qunqun Ye
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiaogang Yuan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Qiang Zhao
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Nuonan Yang
- Health Science Center, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jiaqi Wang
- Health Science Center, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Ting Lu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Dahua Chen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Dawei Chen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jieqiong Lin
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiaona Shao
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lee J, Kim SJ, Kim SW, Song HY, Seo GS, Kim DH, Myung DS, Kim HS, Joo YE, Kim SY. Comparison of optimal bowel cleansing effects of 1L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid versus sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate: A randomized controlled study. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0279631. [PMID: 36584216 PMCID: PMC9803231 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Various low-volume bowel cleansing formulations that improve compliance have been approved and are being used in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of 1 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) with ascorbic acid with that of sodium picosulfate (PICO) with magnesium citrate. This was a multicenter, randomized controlled, non-inferiority study. Patients were randomized into a 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid group and a PICO with magnesium citrate group according to the bowel cleansing agent used. Colonoscopy was performed as a single-blind study wherein the endoscopist had no information about any bowel preparation agent. The efficacy of bowel cleansing was assessed using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and adverse events, preferences, and satisfaction were evaluated using a patient-reported questionnaire before colonoscopy. A total of 254 participants were randomly assigned to two groups: 115 in the 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid group and 113 in the PICO with magnesium citrate group. Overall bowel cleansing success was not statistically different between the two groups (97.4 vs. 97.3%), confirming that 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid was not inferior to PICO with magnesium citrate (lower confidence limit, -4.15%; p = 1.00). High-quality bowel cleansing was achieved in 87% of the 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid group and 77% of the PICO with magnesium citrate group (Lower confidence limit, 1.29%, p = 0.05). In terms of patient satisfaction, PICO with magnesium citrate was better, but compliance and side effects were similar in both groups. The 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid showed similar efficacy and adverse events as PICO with magnesium citrate. Although 1 L PEG with ascorbic acid is very effective in bowel preparation despite its small volume, it is necessary to increase satisfaction such as taste and feeling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Seong-Jung Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang-Wook Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Jeonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyo-Yeop Song
- Department of Internal Medicine and Digestive Disease Research Institute, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Republic of Korea
| | - Geom Seog Seo
- Department of Internal Medicine and Digestive Disease Research Institute, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Republic of Korea
| | - Dong-Hyun Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Dae-Seong Myung
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyun-Soo Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - Young-Eun Joo
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| | - So Yeong Kim
- Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Reumkens A, van der Zander Q, Winkens B, Bogie R, Bakker CM, Sanduleanu S, Masclee AAM. Electrolyte disturbances after bowel preparation for colonoscopy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2022; 34:913-926. [PMID: 35037327 PMCID: PMC9543544 DOI: 10.1111/den.14237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Revised: 01/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies to explore pooled prevalence and magnitude of electrolyte changes after bowel preparation for colonoscopy based on the most recent guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS PubMed and Cochrane were queried for population-based studies examining changes in electrolyte values after bowel preparation, published by July 1, 2021. We report prevalences of serum hypokalemia, hyponatremia, hyperphosphatemia, and hypocalcemia after bowel preparation and changes in mean electrolyte values after vs. before bowel preparation using sodium phosphate (NaP) and polyethylene glycol (PEG). RESULTS Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria; 2386 unique patients were included. Overall, hypokalemia was found in 17.2% (95% CI 6.7, 30.9) in the NaP group vs. 4.8% (95% CI 0.27, 13.02) in the PEG group. The magnitude of potassium decrease after NaP bowel preparation was significantly increased compared to PEG (mean difference -0.38; 95% CI -0.49 to -0.27, P < 0.001). No study reported on major complications. CONCLUSIONS Hypokalemia was found in 17.2% of patients after bowel preparation with NaP and in 4.8% of patients with PEG, a finding that is clinically relevant with respect to choosing the type of bowel preparation. The magnitude of the potassium decrease after NaP was significantly higher compared to PEG. These data provide the evidence that supports the recommendation of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy against routine use of NaP for bowel preparation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ankie Reumkens
- Department of Internal Medicine and GastroenterologyZuyderland Medical CenterHeerlenThe Netherlands
- Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyDepartment of Internal MedicineMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- NUTRIMSchool for Nutrition, Toxicology and MetabolismMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Quirine van der Zander
- Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyDepartment of Internal MedicineMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- GROWSchool for Oncology and Developmental BiologyMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Bjorn Winkens
- Department of Methodology and StatisticsMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- CAPHRISchool for Public Health and Primary CareMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Roel Bogie
- Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyDepartment of Internal MedicineMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- GROWSchool for Oncology and Developmental BiologyMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Christine Minke Bakker
- Department of Internal Medicine and GastroenterologyZuyderland Medical CenterHeerlenThe Netherlands
| | - Silvia Sanduleanu
- Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyDepartment of Internal MedicineMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- GROWSchool for Oncology and Developmental BiologyMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| | - Ad A. M. Masclee
- Division of Gastroenterology and HepatologyDepartment of Internal MedicineMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
- NUTRIMSchool for Nutrition, Toxicology and MetabolismMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Serum electrolytes, osmolality, and cleansing quality after bowel prep for colonoscopy with a PEG solution containing ascorbic acid and electrolytes. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022; 37:301-307. [PMID: 34718842 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-04058-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/25/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cleansing procedure with PEG 3350 + ascorbic acid (PEG + Asc; Moviprep®) requires the additional ingestion of clear liquids. We aimed to determine the effects on serum electrolytes, osmolality and cleansing quality, and in a prospective "real world" trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients underwent a standardized split-dose bowel preparation for colonoscopy with PEG + Asc. Serum electrolytes and osmolality were measured before and after the prep procedure. The volume of prep solution (PA) and additional clear liquid (CL) was recorded. Prep quality was assessed using the Ottawa Bowel Prep Grading Scale (OBPS). The primary outcome measures were changes of serum electrolytes and osmolality during the cleansing procedure. A secondary end point was the OPBS. RESULTS One hundred ninety-one of 219 patients entered the per protocol analysis. Prep quality was considered excellent in 57.6%, moderate in 20.9%, and insufficient in 21.5%. The number of patients with hyponatremia increased from 12 (6.3%) before to 25 (13.2%) after the prep procedure. Mean sodium concentration did not change significantly. The volume of CL correlated inversely with Na+ concentration (r = - 0.409, p < 0.01) and a worse OBPS (r = 0.198, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Bowel preparation with PEG-Asc in clinical routine is generally safe, but patients should be advised not to drink more than 2 l of clear liquid because of imminent electrolyte disturbances. Additionally, the quality of cleansing either remains unchanged or may even worsen.
Collapse
|
5
|
van Riswijk MLM, van Keulen KE, Siersema PD. Efficacy of ultra-low volume (≤1 L) bowel preparation fluids: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2022; 34:13-32. [PMID: 33991373 PMCID: PMC9290948 DOI: 10.1111/den.14015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Revised: 05/04/2021] [Accepted: 05/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS High-quality bowel preparation is paramount for the diagnostic accuracy and safety of colonoscopy; however, it is often difficult for patients to adhere to high-volume laxatives, which may contribute to poor bowel preparation. This review aims to assess the efficacy of bowel preparation fluids of 1 L or less (≤1 L). METHODS We performed a systematic review including all relevant randomized controlled trials on ultra-low volume (≤1 L) bowel preparation fluids for colonoscopy published since 2015. Primary endpoint was the percentage of adequately prepared patients. Secondary endpoints included adenoma detection rate (ADR) and safety. RESULTS Bowel preparation with sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC; 19 trials, n = 10,287), 1L-polyethylene glycol with ascorbate (PEGA; 10 trials, n = 1717), sodium phosphate (NaP; 2 trials, n = 621), and oral sulfate solution (OSS; 3 trials, n = 597) was adequate in 75.2%, 82.9%, 81.9%, and 92.1%, respectively, of patients; however, heterogeneity between studies was considerable (I2 range: 86-98%). Pooled ADRs were 31.1% with SPMC, 32.3% with 1L-PEGA, 30.4% with NaP, and 40.9% with OSS. Temporary electrolyte changes were seen with all ultra-low volume bowel preparation fluid solutions but without sustained effects in most patients. CONCLUSION Ultra-low volume bowel preparation fluids do not always meet the 90% quality standard for adequate bowel preparation as defined by current guidelines. Nonetheless, they may be considered in patients intolerant for higher-volume laxatives and without risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation or dehydration-related complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Milou L. M. van Riswijk
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyRadboud University Medical CenterRadboud Institute for Health SciencesNijmegenThe Netherlands
| | - Kelly E. van Keulen
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyRadboud University Medical CenterRadboud Institute for Health SciencesNijmegenThe Netherlands
| | - Peter D. Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyRadboud University Medical CenterRadboud Institute for Health SciencesNijmegenThe Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
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. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2020; 2020:9548171. [PMID: 32190045 PMCID: PMC7072100 DOI: 10.1155/2020/9548171] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2019] [Revised: 01/12/2020] [Accepted: 02/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
The Efficacy of Split-Dose Bowel Preparations for Polyp Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114:884-892. [PMID: 30865011 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Split-dose bowel preparation leads to superior colon cleansing for colonoscopy. However, the magnitude of benefit in detecting colonic polyps is uncertain. We performed a systematic review to synthesize the data on whether using a split-dose bowel preparation regimen improves the detection of polyps when compared with other dosing methods or regimen products. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases (from the inception to June 2017) for randomized controlled trials that assessed the following: split-dose vs day-before, split-dose vs same-day (as colonoscopy), or different types of split-dose regimens for patients undergoing colonoscopy. We excluded studies limited to inpatients, children, or individuals with inflammatory bowel disease. We compared the number of patients undergoing colonoscopy with recorded detection of polyps, adenomas, advanced adenomas, sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), right colonic adenomas, right colonic polyps, or right colonic SSPs. RESULTS Twenty-eight trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria (8,842 participants). Of the seven trials comparing split-dose vs day-before bowel preparation regimens, there was an increased detection rate of adenomas (risk ratio (RR) 1.26, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 1.10-1.44; 4 trials; 1,258 participants), advanced adenomas (RR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.22-1.92; 3 trials; 1,155 participants), and SSPs (RR 2.48, 95% CI: 1.21-5.09; 2 trials; 1,045 participants). Pooled estimates from 8 trials (1,587 participants) evaluating split-dose vs same-day bowel preparations yielded no evidence of statistical difference. For various split-dose vs split-dose trials, 14 fulfilled the criteria (5,496 participants) and no superior split-regimen was identified. CONCLUSIONS Compared with day-before bowel preparation regimens, split-dose bowel preparations regimens increase the detection of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and have the greatest benefit in SSP detection.
Collapse
|
8
|
Rostom A, Dube C, Bishay K, Antonova L, Heitman SJ, Hilsden R. A randomized clinical prospective trial comparing split-dose picosulfate/ magnesium citrate and polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy preparation. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0211136. [PMID: 30921345 PMCID: PMC6438535 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Colonoscopy remains the gold standard for the investigation of abnormalities within the colon. However, its success is highly dependent on the quality of bowel preparation. The objective of this study was to compare the bowel preparation efficacy of picosulfate/magnesium citrate (PMC) vs polyethylene glycol (PEG) in a one-day vs two-day split dose regimen. Methods A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted at the Forzani & MacPhail Colon Cancer Screening Centre in Calgary, Canada. 171 colonoscopy outpatients were randomized to split-dose PMC or PEG lavage as well as into one-day split or two-day split regimens in blocks of eight. Bowel preparation quality was recorded in a blinded manner by the endoscopist using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS) prior to washing or suctioning. The scale results were analyzed using a two-factor analysis of variance. Results 141 patients received complete colonoscopies (PMC-71; PEG-70). PEG was found to be superior to PMC (mean OBPS: 4.14 ± 2.64 vs 5.11 ± 3.44, p = 0.019), when adjusted for administration regimen, leading to significantly more adequate bowel preparations (79.7% vs 59.7%, p = 0.007). A two-day split dose was superior to a one-day split dose regimen (mean OBPS: 3.68± 2.82 vs 5.69 ± 3.06, p<0.001). Two-day split dosing also resulted in a better right colon cleanliness score (right bowel OBPS 1.27±0.11 vs 2.10±0.12 for one-day split, P<0.001). Conclusions Optimal bowel preparation was achieved with the use of PEG lavage when administered in a two-day split dose regimen. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT01415687.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alaa Rostom
- Department of Medicine and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
- * E-mail:
| | - Catherine Dube
- Department of Medicine and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Kirles Bishay
- Department of Medicine and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Lilia Antonova
- Department of Medicine and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Steven J. Heitman
- Department of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Robert Hilsden
- Department of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Systematic review and meta-analysis: sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate vs. polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy preparation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2016; 72:523-32. [PMID: 26818765 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-016-2013-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2015] [Accepted: 01/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Previous studies comparing sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) with polyethylene glycol (PEG) drew inconsistent conclusions. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the performance of the two agents for colonoscopy preparation. METHODS A search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to July 2015 was acquired, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. We calculated the pooled estimates of bowel cleanliness, polyp/adenoma detection rate (PDR/ADR), completion of preparation, willingness to repeat identical bowel preparation, and adverse events by using relative risk (RR) with random-effects models. A non-inferiority analysis was performed, comparing SPMC to PEG for bowel cleaning efficacy. RESULTS A total of 25 RCTs were qualified for analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between the two agents in bowel cleanliness, but the effect direction showed a trend in favor of PEG (RR 0.93; 95 % CI 0.86-1.01, P = 0.07). The non-inferiority analysis demonstrated the non-inferiority of SPMC by retaining at least 90 % of the effect of PEG. Similarly, there was no significant difference between the two agents in PDR (RR 0.94; 95 % CI 0.82-1.08, P = 0.37) and ADR (RR 0.88; 95 % CI 0.74-1.05, P = 0.16). However, a higher proportion of patients were likely to complete SPMC preparation (RR 1.08; 95 % CI 1.04-1.13, P < 0.001) and were willing to repeat SPMC preparation (RR 1.44; 95 % CI 1.25-1.67, P < 0.001). The total number of adverse events was significantly lower in the SPMC group (RR 0.78; 95 % CI 0.66-0.93, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS SPMC, with better tolerability and less frequent adverse events, demonstrated non-inferior bowel cleaning efficacy than that of the PEG. Large-scale, well-organized, head-to-head studies are warranted.
Collapse
|
10
|
Aarntzen EHJG, Hermsen R, Drenth JPH, Boerman OC, Oyen WJG. 99mTc-CXCL8 SPECT to Monitor Disease Activity in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. J Nucl Med 2015; 57:398-403. [PMID: 26609182 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.165795] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2015] [Accepted: 11/10/2015] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
UNLABELLED Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are defined as chronic relapsing immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. IBD exacerbations are characterized by recruitment of mainly CXCL8 receptor-expressing activated neutrophils into the intestinal wall, leading to severe damage. Considering its chronic relapsing character, accurate and timely diagnosis of an exacerbation is pivotal for early adaptation of the treatment and reduction of the disease burden. However, endoscopic evaluation is invasive and associated with an increased risk of perforation. We previously developed a (99m)Tc-labeled CXCL8 preparation in preclinical models including colitis and clinical studies. METHODS In this study, we investigate the accuracy of (99m)Tc-CXCL8 SPECT to detect and localize disease activity in a prospective series of patients with IBD. Thirty patients (15 Crohns disease, 15 ulcerative colitis) participated, and 92 segmental pairs of histology and (99m)Tc-CXCL8 scans were studied. Imaging was performed after injection of 400 MBq of (99m)Tc-CXCL8. Planar and SPECT images of the abdomen were acquired at 30 min and 4 h after the injection. RESULTS The overall sensitivity and specificity on a per-patient basis for the detection of active disease were 95% and 44% for (99m)Tc-CXCL8 scan and 71% and 70% for endoscopy. The degree of (99m)Tc-CXCL8 accumulation correlated to the degree of neutrophilic influx in affected mucosa. Sensitivity and specificity on a per-segment basis, calculated from the 92 segmental pairs, were 82% and 72%, negative predictive value was 81%, and overall positive predictive value was 74%. Specificity could be increased at the expense of sensitivity using different cutoffs. In 74 segmental pairs, overall sensitivity and specificity for endoscopy were 74% and 85%, positive predictive value was 81%, and negative predictive value was 79%. CONCLUSION (99m)Tc-CXCL8 SPECT provides a novel imaging technique to target neutrophil recruitment to the intestinal wall, especially in moderate to severe exacerbations of IBD. Further validation studies are warranted to potentiate (99m)Tc-CXCL8 SPECT as a biomarker to scale up or step down treatment with immune-modulating drugs in a personalized fashion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik H J G Aarntzen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Rick Hermsen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Department of Nuclear Medicine, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; and
| | - Joost P H Drenth
- Department of Gastro-Enterology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Otto C Boerman
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Wim J G Oyen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|