Impact of Prepackaged Low-Residue Diet on Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Meta-analysis.

Yuanyuan Zhang, Caiyan Ding, Jing Li, Xianyu Hu, Yifan Wang, Wei Tang
{"title":"Impact of Prepackaged Low-Residue Diet on Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Meta-analysis.","authors":"Yuanyuan Zhang,&nbsp;Caiyan Ding,&nbsp;Jing Li,&nbsp;Xianyu Hu,&nbsp;Yifan Wang,&nbsp;Wei Tang","doi":"10.1097/SGA.0000000000000588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of prepackaged low-residue diet (PLRD) on bowel preparation for colonoscopy. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PLRD with clear liquid diet (CLD) or self-prepared LRD were considered for inclusion. The analysis calculated the odds ratio (OR) for the rate of adequate bowel preparation, patient tolerance, willingness to repeat bowel preparation, tolerability of bowel preparation, and overall adverse effects. Five RCTs published between 2006 and 2019 (N = 561) were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with the traditional CLD or self-prepared LRD, PLRD showed significantly higher rates of adequate bowel preparation (OR, 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-3.98; p = .01), patient tolerance (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.30-3.07; p = .002), and willingness to repeat the bowel preparation (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.05-2.70; p = .03), with no differences in adverse events (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.59-1.46; p = .75). Prepackaged low-residue diet improved bowel preparation quality, patient tolerance, and willingness to repeat bowel preparations. Importantly, PLRD does not increase the incidence of adverse events. This suggests that it is effective and safe to use PLRD for bowel preparation before colonoscopy.</p>","PeriodicalId":504885,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology nursing : the official journal of the Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates","volume":" ","pages":"E29-E37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology nursing : the official journal of the Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SGA.0000000000000588","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of prepackaged low-residue diet (PLRD) on bowel preparation for colonoscopy. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PLRD with clear liquid diet (CLD) or self-prepared LRD were considered for inclusion. The analysis calculated the odds ratio (OR) for the rate of adequate bowel preparation, patient tolerance, willingness to repeat bowel preparation, tolerability of bowel preparation, and overall adverse effects. Five RCTs published between 2006 and 2019 (N = 561) were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with the traditional CLD or self-prepared LRD, PLRD showed significantly higher rates of adequate bowel preparation (OR, 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-3.98; p = .01), patient tolerance (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.30-3.07; p = .002), and willingness to repeat the bowel preparation (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.05-2.70; p = .03), with no differences in adverse events (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.59-1.46; p = .75). Prepackaged low-residue diet improved bowel preparation quality, patient tolerance, and willingness to repeat bowel preparations. Importantly, PLRD does not increase the incidence of adverse events. This suggests that it is effective and safe to use PLRD for bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

预包装低残留饮食对结肠镜检查肠道准备的影响:一项荟萃分析。
本荟萃分析旨在评估预包装低残留饮食(PLRD)对结肠镜检查肠道准备的影响。我们检索了PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE和Cochrane Library数据库,从成立到2020年8月。将PLRD与透明液体饮食(CLD)或自制LRD进行比较的随机对照试验(rct)被纳入考虑。该分析计算了充分的肠道准备率、患者耐受性、重复肠道准备的意愿、肠道准备的耐受性和总体不良反应的优势比(OR)。我们的荟萃分析纳入了2006年至2019年发表的5项随机对照试验(N = 561)。与传统的CLD或自行准备的LRD相比,PLRD显示出更高的肠道准备率(or, 2.16;95%置信区间[CI], 1.18-3.98;p = 0.01),患者耐受性(OR, 1.99;95% ci, 1.30-3.07;p = .002),以及重复肠道准备的意愿(OR, 1.68;95% ci, 1.05-2.70;p = .03),不良事件发生率无差异(OR, 0.93;95% ci, 0.59-1.46;P = .75)。预先包装的低残留饮食改善了肠准备质量,患者耐受性和重复肠准备的意愿。重要的是,PLRD不会增加不良事件的发生率。这表明在结肠镜检查前使用PLRD进行肠道准备是有效和安全的。
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