Impact of bowel preparation type on the quality of colonoscopy: a multicenter community-based study

被引:10
作者
Martin, Daniel [1 ]
Walayat, Saqib [1 ]
Ahmed, Zohair [2 ]
Dhillon, Sonu [1 ]
Asche, Carl V. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Puli, Srinivas [1 ]
Ren, Jinma [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] OSF St Francis Med Ctr, Dept Gastroenterol, Peoria, IL USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Peoria, IL 61656 USA
[3] Univ Illinois, Coll Med, Ctr Outcomes Res, Peoria, IL 61656 USA
[4] Univ Illinois, Coll Pharm, Dept Pharm Syst Outcomes & Policy, Chicago, IL USA
来源
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY HOSPITAL INTERNAL MEDICINE PERSPECTIVES | 2016年 / 6卷 / 02期
关键词
sodium sulfate; polyethylene glycol; bowel prep; colonoscopy;
D O I
10.3402/jchimp.v6.31074
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: High-quality bowel preparation is crucial for achieving the goals of colonoscopy. However, choosing a bowel preparation in clinical practice can be challenging because of the many formulations. This study aims to assess the impact the type of bowel preparation on the quality of colonoscopy in a community hospital setting. Methods: A retrospective, observational study was conducted utilizing a colonoscopy screening/surveillance database in central Illinois during the period of January 1, 2010, to March 31, 2014. Patients without bowel preparation assessment were excluded from this study. Controlling for the confounders, generalized linear models were used to estimate the adjusted impact [odds ratio (OR)] of bowel preparation type on the quality of preparation (excellent, good, fair, and poor), and on the detection of advanced adenoma. The association between the time of withdrawal after insertion and the quality of preparation was also examined using a linear model. Results: A total of 28,368 colonoscopies; half the patients were male, and the average age was 61 +/- 9 years. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) was used in the majority (70.2%) of bowel preparations, followed by sodium sulfate (21.4%), sodium phosphate (2.5%), magnesium sulfate (0.4%), and others. Compared with PEG, magnesium sulfate had a poorer quality of bowel preparations (OR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9; p < 0.05), whereas the quality of bowel preparation was significantly improved by using sodium sulfate (OR = 5.7, 95% CI 5.4-6.1; p < 0.001) and sodium phosphate (OR = 2.1, 95% CI 1.8-2.5; p < 0.001). For those who had adequate bowel preparation, the better quality of preparation significantly increased the detection rate of advanced adenoma (5.0, 3.6, and 2.9% for excellent, good, and fair, respectively). Conclusion: When possible, sodium sulfate-based preparations should be recommended in the community setting for colonoscopy because of their high quality of bowel preparation.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Impact of fair bowel preparation quality on adenoma and serrated polyp detection: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry by using a standardized preparation-quality rating [J].
Anderson, Joseph C. ;
Butterly, Lynn F. ;
Robinson, Christina M. ;
Goodrich, Martha ;
Weiss, Julia E. .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2014, 80 (03) :463-470
[2]   Commonly used preparations for colonoscopy: Efficacy, tolerability and safety - A Canadian Association of Gastroenterology position paper [J].
Barkun, Alan ;
Chiba, Naoki ;
Enns, Robert ;
Marcon, Margaret ;
Natsheh, Susan ;
PharmD, Co Pham ;
Sadowski, Dan ;
Vanner, Stephen .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2006, 20 (11) :699-710
[3]   Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy [J].
Belsey, J. ;
Epstein, O. ;
Heresbach, D. .
ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2007, 25 (04) :373-384
[4]   Meta-analysis: the relative efficacy of oral bowel preparations for colonoscopy 1985-2010 [J].
Belsey, J. ;
Crosta, C. ;
Epstein, O. ;
Fischbach, W. ;
Layer, P. ;
Parente, F. ;
Halphen, M. .
ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2012, 35 (02) :222-237
[5]   Can I Improve My Adenoma Detection Rate? [J].
Chaptini, Louis ;
Laine, Loren .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 49 (04) :270-281
[6]  
Corley DA, 2014, NEW ENGL J MED, V370, P2541, DOI [10.1056/NEJMoa1309086, 10.1056/NEJMc1405329]
[7]   Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study [J].
Froehlich, F ;
Wietlisbach, V ;
Gonvers, JJ ;
Burnand, B ;
Vader, JP .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2005, 61 (03) :378-384
[8]   Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia [J].
Harewood, GC ;
Sharma, VK ;
de Garmo, P .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2003, 58 (01) :76-79
[9]   The Effect of the Bowel Preparation Status on the Risk of Missing Polyp and Adenoma during Screening Colonoscopy: A Tandem Colonoscopic Study [J].
Hong, Sung Noh ;
Sung, In Kyung ;
Kim, Jeong Hwan ;
Choe, Won Hyeok ;
Kim, Byung Kook ;
Ko, Soon Young ;
Lee, Jung Hyun ;
Seol, Dong Choon ;
Ahn, Su Young ;
Lee, Sun-Young ;
Park, Hyung Seok ;
Shim, Chan Sup .
CLINICAL ENDOSCOPY, 2012, 45 (04) :404-411
[10]   Meta-analysis and cost comparison of polyethylene glycol lavage versus sodium phosphate for colonoscopy preparation [J].
Hsu, CW ;
Imperiale, TF .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1998, 48 (03) :276-282