Pilot randomized trial of efficacy and safety of yogic technique versus polyethylene glycol solution for bowel preparation in colonoscopy

iGIE Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.igie.2024.08.005
Manas Kumar Panigrahi MD, DM, FRCP (Edin) , Mitali Madhumita Rath MD , Mohd Imran Chouhan MD, DM , Rajesh Manik PhD , Ajaya Ghosh R U MSc , Madhav Sameer Makashir MD, DM , Hemanta Kumar Nayak MD, DM , Biswa Mohan Padhy MD, DM , Subash Chandra Samal MD, DM
{"title":"Pilot randomized trial of efficacy and safety of yogic technique versus polyethylene glycol solution for bowel preparation in colonoscopy","authors":"Manas Kumar Panigrahi MD, DM, FRCP (Edin) ,&nbsp;Mitali Madhumita Rath MD ,&nbsp;Mohd Imran Chouhan MD, DM ,&nbsp;Rajesh Manik PhD ,&nbsp;Ajaya Ghosh R U MSc ,&nbsp;Madhav Sameer Makashir MD, DM ,&nbsp;Hemanta Kumar Nayak MD, DM ,&nbsp;Biswa Mohan Padhy MD, DM ,&nbsp;Subash Chandra Samal MD, DM","doi":"10.1016/j.igie.2024.08.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><div>The traditional yogic technique of shankha prakshalana (SP) has been known to cleanse the bowel, but its efficacy as a bowel preparation agent in colonoscopy has not been studied widely. We compared the efficacy and safety of SP with split-dose polyethylene glycol (PG) in bowel preparation for colonoscopy.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized into 2 groups: PG group (n = 47) and SP group (n = 47). Patients in the PG group were given 2 liters of PG 3350 in a split-dose regimen. Patients in the SP group were administered 400 mL of lukewarm saline water followed by a set of 5 asanas (physical exercises) of SP, with each asana performed 8 times under the supervision of a certified yoga trainer (R.M.). This constituted 1 cycle, which was repeated 6 times (total intake of 2400 mL lukewarm saline water). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to assess the main outcome of the efficacy of bowel preparation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 94 patients were enrolled, with 47 in each study group. The mean BBPS for the whole colon in the SP group (8.15 ± 1.02) was higher than that in the PG group (7.55 ± 1.08; <em>P</em> = .007). Moreover, the segmental BBPS for the right side of the colon was significantly higher in the SP group (2.64 ± 0.48) than in the PG group (2.36 ± 0.60; <em>P</em> = .010). Adverse effects, such as nausea (31.9% vs 4.3%; <em>P</em> = .001), bloating (27.7% vs none; <em>P</em> &lt; .0001), and disturbed sleep (63.8% vs 12.8%; <em>P</em> &lt; .0001), were significantly more frequent in the PG group than in the SP group.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The traditional yogic technique of shankha prakshalana is an effective method for bowel preparation in colonoscopy, with overall better efficacy and safety, compared with the standard split-dose PG regimen. (Clinical trial registration number: CTRI/2020/07/026899.)</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100652,"journal":{"name":"iGIE","volume":"4 1","pages":"Pages 31-37.e1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"iGIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949708624001109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims

The traditional yogic technique of shankha prakshalana (SP) has been known to cleanse the bowel, but its efficacy as a bowel preparation agent in colonoscopy has not been studied widely. We compared the efficacy and safety of SP with split-dose polyethylene glycol (PG) in bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Methods

Patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized into 2 groups: PG group (n = 47) and SP group (n = 47). Patients in the PG group were given 2 liters of PG 3350 in a split-dose regimen. Patients in the SP group were administered 400 mL of lukewarm saline water followed by a set of 5 asanas (physical exercises) of SP, with each asana performed 8 times under the supervision of a certified yoga trainer (R.M.). This constituted 1 cycle, which was repeated 6 times (total intake of 2400 mL lukewarm saline water). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to assess the main outcome of the efficacy of bowel preparation.

Results

A total of 94 patients were enrolled, with 47 in each study group. The mean BBPS for the whole colon in the SP group (8.15 ± 1.02) was higher than that in the PG group (7.55 ± 1.08; P = .007). Moreover, the segmental BBPS for the right side of the colon was significantly higher in the SP group (2.64 ± 0.48) than in the PG group (2.36 ± 0.60; P = .010). Adverse effects, such as nausea (31.9% vs 4.3%; P = .001), bloating (27.7% vs none; P < .0001), and disturbed sleep (63.8% vs 12.8%; P < .0001), were significantly more frequent in the PG group than in the SP group.

Conclusions

The traditional yogic technique of shankha prakshalana is an effective method for bowel preparation in colonoscopy, with overall better efficacy and safety, compared with the standard split-dose PG regimen. (Clinical trial registration number: CTRI/2020/07/026899.)
瑜伽技术与聚乙二醇溶液在结肠镜检查中用于肠道准备的有效性和安全性的随机试验
背景与目的传统的瑜伽技术shankha prakshalana (SP)被认为可以清洁肠道,但其在结肠镜检查中作为肠道准备剂的功效尚未得到广泛研究。我们比较了SP与分剂量聚乙二醇(PG)在结肠镜检查肠道准备中的疗效和安全性。方法择期结肠镜检查患者随机分为两组:PG组(n = 47)和SP组(n = 47)。PG组患者分次给药2升PG 3350。SP组的患者被给予400毫升的温盐水,然后进行一组5个SP体式(体育锻炼),每个体式在认证瑜伽教练(R.M.)的监督下做8次。1个周期,重复6次(共摄入温盐水2400 mL)。波士顿肠准备量表(BBPS)用于评估肠准备疗效的主要结果。结果共纳入94例患者,每个研究组47例。SP组全结肠平均BBPS(8.15±1.02)高于PG组(7.55±1.08);P = .007)。此外,SP组结肠右侧节段性BBPS(2.64±0.48)明显高于PG组(2.36±0.60;P = .010)。不良反应,如恶心(31.9% vs 4.3%;P = .001),腹胀(27.7% vs无;P & lt;0.0001),睡眠障碍(63.8% vs 12.8%;P & lt;.0001), PG组的发生率明显高于SP组。结论传统瑜伽术shankha prakshalana是结肠镜下肠准备的有效方法,与标准分剂量PG方案相比,总体疗效和安全性更好。(临床试验注册号:CTRI/2020/07/026899)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信