The impact of low-versus standard-volume bowel preparation on participation in primary screening colonoscopy: a randomized health services study

被引:10
作者
Pisera, Malgorzata [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Franczyk, Robert [2 ]
Wieszczy, Paulina [1 ,3 ]
Polkowski, Marcin [1 ,2 ]
Rupinsk, Maciej [1 ,2 ]
Chaber-Ciopinska, Anna [1 ,2 ]
Kotowski, Bronislaw [2 ,4 ]
Kula, Zbigniew [5 ]
Kielek, Slawomir [6 ,7 ]
Buszkiewicz, Marek [8 ]
Rupinska, Maria [1 ,2 ]
Kobiela, Jaroslaw [9 ]
Kaminski, Michal Filip [1 ,2 ,3 ,10 ]
Regula, Jaroslaw [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Postgrad Med Educ, Dept Gastroenterol Hepatol & Oncol, Warsaw, Poland
[2] M Sklodowska Curie Mem Canc Ctr & Inst Oncol, Dept Gastroenterol Oncol, Warsaw, Poland
[3] M Sklodowska Curie Mem Canc Ctr & Inst Oncol, Dept Canc Prevent, WK Roentgena 5 Str, PL-02781 Warsaw, Poland
[4] Polish Fdn Gastroenterol, Warsaw, Poland
[5] F Lukaszczyk Oncol Ctr, Dept Endoscopy, Bydgoszcz, Poland
[6] Diagnost & Therapeut Ctr Medyk, Konin, Poland
[7] Diagnost & Therapeut Ctr Medyk, Kalisz, Poland
[8] NZOZ DOMED, Gorzow Wielkopolski, Poland
[9] Med Univ Gdansk, Dept Gen Endocrine & Transplant Surg, Gdansk, Poland
[10] Univ Oslo, Dept Hlth Management & Hlth Econ, Oslo, Norway
关键词
SODIUM PICOSULFATE/MAGNESIUM CITRATE; COLORECTAL-CANCER; POLYETHYLENE-GLYCOL; REPORTED BARRIERS; TRIAL; MULTICENTER; MORTALITY; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1055/a-0748-5479
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of low-volume vs. standard-volume bowel preparation on participation in screening colonoscopy, bowel preparation quality, and lesion detection rates. Methods This was a multicenter, randomized, health services study within the population-based primary colonoscopy screening program in Poland. Individuals aged 55-62 years were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to bowel preparation with a low-volume (0.3 L sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) or standard-volume (4L polyethylene glycol) regimen and then invited to participate in screening colonoscopy. The primary outcome measure was the rate of participation in screening colonoscopy. Compliance with the assigned bowel preparation, bowel preparation quality, and lesion detection rates were also evaluated. Results A total of 13621 individuals were randomized and 13497 were analyzed (6752 in the low-volume group and 6745 in the standard-volume group). The participation rate (16.6% vs. 15.5%; P=0.08) and compliance rate (93.3% vs. 94.1%; P=0.39) did not differ significantly between the groups. In the low-volume group, fewer participants had adequate bowel preparation compared with the standard-volume group (whole colon 79.0% vs. 86.4%, P<0.001; proximal colon 80.1% vs. 87.3%, P<0.001). Detection rates of advanced adenoma (AADR) and advanced serrated polyps (ASPDR) were lower in the low-volume group than in the standard-volume group (AADR in the proximal colon 2.6% vs. 4.3%, P=0.02; ASPDR in the whole colon 2.0% vs. 3.3%, P=0.04; ASPDR in the proximal colon 1.0% vs. 1.9%, P=0.048). Conclusion When compared with a standard-volume bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol, low-volume bowel preparation with sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate did not improve participation rate or lesion detection rates, and negatively affected bowel preparation quality.
引用
收藏
页码:227 / 236
页数:10
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], UNITED EUROPEAN GAST
[2]  
Bosman FT, 2010, WHO Classification of tumors of the digestive system
[3]   Population-Based Colonoscopy Screening for Colorectal Cancer A Randomized Clinical Trial [J].
Bretthauer, Michael ;
Kaminski, Michal F. ;
Loberg, Magnus ;
Zauber, Ann G. ;
Regula, Jaroslaw ;
Kuipers, Ernst J. ;
Hernan, Miguel A. ;
McFadden, Eleanor ;
Sunde, Annike ;
Kalager, Mette ;
Dekker, Evelien ;
Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Iris ;
Garborg, Kjetil ;
Rupinski, Maciej ;
Spaander, Manon C. W. ;
Bugajski, Marek ;
Hoie, Ole ;
Stefansson, Tryggvi ;
Hoff, Geir ;
Adami, Hans-Olov .
JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2016, 176 (07) :894-902
[4]   Modifiable factors associated with patient-reported pain during and after screening colonoscopy [J].
Bugajski, Marek ;
Wieszczy, Paulina ;
Hoff, Geir ;
Rupinski, Maciej ;
Regula, Jaroslaw ;
Kaminski, Michal Filip .
GUT, 2018, 67 (11) :1958-1964
[5]   Reasons for Participation and Nonparticipation in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Trial of Colonoscopy and CT Colonography [J].
de Wijkerslooth, Thomas R. ;
de Haan, Margriet C. ;
Stoop, Esther M. ;
Bossuyt, Patrick M. ;
Thomeer, Maarten ;
van Leerdam, Monique E. ;
Essink-Bot, Marie-Louise ;
Fockens, Paul ;
Kuipers, Ernst J. ;
Stoker, Jaap ;
Dekker, Evelien .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2012, 107 (12) :1777-1783
[6]   Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: Estimates for 40 countries in 2012 [J].
Ferlay, J. ;
Steliarova-Foucher, E. ;
Lortet-Tieulent, J. ;
Rosso, S. ;
Coebergh, J. W. W. ;
Comber, H. ;
Forman, D. ;
Bray, F. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2013, 49 (06) :1374-1403
[7]   Randomised health services studies [J].
Hakama, Matti ;
Malila, Nea ;
Dillner, Joakim .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2012, 131 (12) :2898-2902
[8]   Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline [J].
Hassan, C. ;
Bretthauer, M. ;
Kaminski, M. F. ;
Polkowski, M. ;
Rembacken, B. ;
Saunders, B. ;
Benamouzig, R. ;
Holme, O. ;
Green, S. ;
Kuiper, T. ;
Marmo, R. ;
Omar, M. ;
Petruzziello, L. ;
Spada, C. ;
Zullo, A. ;
Dumonceau, J. M. .
ENDOSCOPY, 2013, 45 (02) :142-150
[9]  
Inadomi JM, 2012, ARCH INTERN MED, V172, P575, DOI 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.332
[10]   Systematic review and meta-analysis: sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate vs. polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy preparation [J].
Jin, Zheng ;
Lu, Yi ;
Zhou, Yi ;
Gong, Biao .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2016, 72 (05) :523-532