Eficacia y seguridad de 3 esquemas para la preparación del colon para colonoscopia (Polietilenglicol (PEG) 4 litros (dosis única) vs PEG 4 litros dividido (2L+2L) vs PEG 2 litros dividido volumen bajo (1L + 1L): Ensayo clínico controlado aleatorizado
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22516/25007440.393Keywords:
Efficacy, preparation, colon, polyethylene glycol, low volume, safetyAbstract
Introduction: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for evaluation of the colonic mucosa. Colon cleansing in preparation for colonoscopy depends on finding of polyps which can be adenomatous with malignant potential and the possibility of degenerating into colon cancer.
Objective: This study’s objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of three types of preparations for colon cleansing: a single four liter dose of polyethylene glycol (PEG) vs. two 2 liter doses of PEG vs. two low volume (1L + 1L) doses of PEG.
Methods: This is a randomized controlled clinical trial of patients who underwent elective colonoscopy at a University clinic. It was blinded for the doctor who evaluated colon cleansing. Seventy four patients 74 patients were randomized into each group. The main parameter of effectiveness was integral preparation of adequate quality measured on the Boston scale. Secondary parameters were the percentage of adverse events, tolerability and detection rate of polyps.
Results: Complete preparation of the entire colon was achieved significantly more often with 4 liters divided into two 2 liter doses followed by the other divided alternative (1 L + 1 L). It was achieved least frequently with in the single dose: 79.7%, 75.7% and 63.5%, respectively, p = 0.019. Differences were also found in the detection of polyps (13.5%, 24.3% and 9.5%, respectively, p = 0.037). ) There were no differences in presentation of at least one adverse event (p = 0.254) or in tolerability (p = 0.640).
Conclusions: The two divided dose preparations had higher colon cleansing and polyp detection efficacies than did the single 4L dose while there were no differences in occurrence of adverse events and tolerability. The divided PEG 2L dose could be a very good option for elective colonoscopy preparation.
Downloads
References
Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH, Fanelli RD, Hyman N, Shen B, et al. A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a task force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Jun;63(7):894-909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2006.03.918
ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Saltzman JR, Cash BD, Pasha SF, Early DS, Muthusamy VR, et al. Bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Apr;81(4):781-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.048
Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P, Morikawa T, Liao X, Qian ZR, et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 19;369(12):1095-105. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1301969
Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Hankey BF, et al. Colonoscopic Polypectomy and Long-Term Prevention of Colorectal-Cancer Deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:687-696. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1100370
International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. GLOBOCAN 2012: Estimated Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012. Globocan [Internet]. 2012;1-6. Disponible en: http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx?
Ávila Á, Parada JL, Benítez S. Preparación intestinal colónica con polietilenglicol y manitol: efectividad según la escala de Boston. Gen. Sociedad Venezolana de Gastroentereología. 2013;67(2):76-81.
Lichtenstein G. Bowel preparations for colonoscopy: a review. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2009 Jan 1;66(1):27-37. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp080084
Calderwood AH, Jacobson BC. Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Oct;72(4):686-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2010.06.068
Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):620-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057
Cohen LB. Advances in bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2015 Apr;25(2):183-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giec.2014.11.003
Lorenzo-Zúñiga V, Moreno-de-Vega V, Boix J. Preparation for colonoscopy: types of scales and cleaning products. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2012 Aug;104(8):426-31. https://doi.org/10.4321/S1130-01082012000800006
González-Huix Lladó F, Figa Francesch M, Huertas Nadal C. [Essential quality criteria in the indication and performance of colonoscopy]. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Jan;33(1):33-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gastrohep.2009.02.014
Morán Sánchez S, Torrella E, Esteban Delgado P, Baños Madrid R, García A, Ono A, et al. Colonoscopy quality assessment. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2009 Feb;101(2):107-12, 112-6.
Jover R, Herráiz M, Alarcón O, Brullet E, Bujanda L, Bustamante M, et al. Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy. 2012 Apr;44(4):444-51. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1306690
Martel M, Barkun AN, Menard C, Restellini S, Kherad O, Vanasse A. Split-Dose Preparations Are Superior to Day-Before Bowel Cleansing Regimens: A Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2015 Jul;149(1):79-88. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.004
Xie Q, Chen L, Zhao F, Zhou X, Huang P, Zhang L, et al. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of low-volume polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid versus standard-volume polyethylene glycol solution as bowel preparations for colonoscopy. PLoS One. 2014 Jun 5;9(6):e99092. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099092
Forero E, Cardona H, Reyes G, Abello H, Rosas M, Sánchez C. Preparación intestinal para colonoscopia; comparación entre polietilenglicol y manitol: Estudio de costo efectividad, doble ciego aleatorizado. Rev Col Gastroenterol. 2005 Dec;20(4):60-71.
Sharara AI, Abou Mrad RR. The modern bowel preparation in colonoscopy. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2013 Sep;42(3):577-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2013.05.010
Kilgore TW, Abdinoor AA, Szary NM, Schowengerdt SW, Yust JB, Choudhary A, et al. Bowel preparation with split-dose polyethylene glycol before colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1240-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.02.007
Téllez-Ávila FI, Murcio-Pérez E, Saúl A, Herrera-Gómez S, Valdovinos-Andraca F, Acosta-Nava V, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of low-volume (2 L) versus single- (4 L) versus split-dose (2 L + 2 L) polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for colonoscopy: randomized clinical trial. Dig Endosc. 2014 Nov;26(6):731-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/den.12265
El Sayed AM, Kanafani ZA, Mourad FH, Soweid AM, Barada KA, Adorian CS, et al. A randomized single-blind trial of whole versus split-dose polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solution for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Jul;58(1):36-40. https://doi.org/10.1067/mge.2003.318
Aoun E, Abdul-Baki H, Azar C, Mourad F, Barada K, Berro Z, et al. A randomized single-blind trial of split-dose PEG-electrolyte solution without dietary restriction compared with whole dose PEG-electrolyte solution with dietary restriction for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Aug;62(2):213-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(05)00371-8
Adams WJ, Meagher AP, Lubowski DZ, King DW. Bisacodyl reduces the volume of polyethylene glycol solution required for bowel preparation. Dis Colon Rectum. 1994 Mar;37(3):229-33; discussion 233-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02048160
Sharma VK, Chockalingham SK, Ugheoke EA, Kapur A, Ling PH, Vasudeva R, et al. Prospective, randomized, controlled comparison of the use of polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution in four-liter versus two-liter volumes and pretreatment with either magnesium citrate or bisacodyl for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998 Feb;47(2):167-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(98)70351-7
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Aquellos autores/as que tengan publicaciones con esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes:
Los autores/as ceden sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación en esta revista.
Los contenidos están protegidos bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
