Davide Scalvini, Cristina Bezzio, Stiliano Maimaris, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Lusetti Francesca, Alessandro Cappellini, Carolina Cicalini, Michele Dota, Roberta Muscia, Daniele Brinch, Ignazio Marzio Parisi, Massimo Devani, Mario Schettino, Aurelio Mauro, Simona Agazzi, Stefano Mazza, Laura Rovedatti, Annalisa Schiepatti, Antonio Di Sabatino, Federico Biagi, Gianpiero Manes, Andrea Anderloni, Simone Saibeni
{"title":"炎症性肠病患者肠道准备的多中心研究:门诊1L-PEG-ASC和2L-PEG方案的比较","authors":"Davide Scalvini, Cristina Bezzio, Stiliano Maimaris, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Lusetti Francesca, Alessandro Cappellini, Carolina Cicalini, Michele Dota, Roberta Muscia, Daniele Brinch, Ignazio Marzio Parisi, Massimo Devani, Mario Schettino, Aurelio Mauro, Simona Agazzi, Stefano Mazza, Laura Rovedatti, Annalisa Schiepatti, Antonio Di Sabatino, Federico Biagi, Gianpiero Manes, Andrea Anderloni, Simone Saibeni","doi":"10.1097/MEG.0000000000003005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>There is a paucity of data on which bowel preparation (BP) to use in an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outpatient setting, in particular after the introduction of 1L-PEG-ASC. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the most effective BP between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG and to identify risk factors for inadequate BP in this IBD population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a multicentric, retrospective, cross-sectional study including IBD patients aged >16 years, who underwent outpatient split-dose colonoscopy between January 2021 and December 2022. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to determine the adequacy of BP. Multivariable logistic regression was fitted to compare BP adequacy between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 506 patients (F 42.9%, mean age 48.9 ± 15.2 years) were included and BP was adequate in 440 (87.0%). 1L-PEG-ASC was associated with a higher rate of adequate BP compared to 2L-PEG (89.8% vs. 83.8%, P = 0.048) and higher BBPS score [median 8, interquartile range (IQR): 7-9 vs. 6, IQR: 6-8, P < 0.001]. Male sex ( P = 0.03), previous ileal/colonic surgery ( P = 0.01), and stricturing Crohn's disease (CD) ( P = 0.01) were associated with inadequate BP. At multivariable analysis, 1L-PEG-ASC was a predictor of adequate BP [odds ratios (OR) = 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-2.90, P < 0.05]; whereas male sex (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.90, P = 0.02) and previous ileal/colonic surgery (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.77, P < 0.01) were confirmed as risk factors for inadequate BP.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results from this large real-world cohort highlight the efficiency of 1L-PEG-ASC in providing better BP compared to 2L-PEG. However, further studies are needed to validate our retrospective results and confirm the superiority of 1L-PEG-ASC. Male sex and previous ileal/colonic surgery and stricturing CD were related to poor BP.</p>","PeriodicalId":11999,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":"1127-1134"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A multicenter study on bowel preparation in inflammatory bowel disease patients: comparison between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG regimens in an outpatient setting.\",\"authors\":\"Davide Scalvini, Cristina Bezzio, Stiliano Maimaris, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Lusetti Francesca, Alessandro Cappellini, Carolina Cicalini, Michele Dota, Roberta Muscia, Daniele Brinch, Ignazio Marzio Parisi, Massimo Devani, Mario Schettino, Aurelio Mauro, Simona Agazzi, Stefano Mazza, Laura Rovedatti, Annalisa Schiepatti, Antonio Di Sabatino, Federico Biagi, Gianpiero Manes, Andrea Anderloni, Simone Saibeni\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MEG.0000000000003005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>There is a paucity of data on which bowel preparation (BP) to use in an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outpatient setting, in particular after the introduction of 1L-PEG-ASC. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the most effective BP between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG and to identify risk factors for inadequate BP in this IBD population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a multicentric, retrospective, cross-sectional study including IBD patients aged >16 years, who underwent outpatient split-dose colonoscopy between January 2021 and December 2022. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to determine the adequacy of BP. Multivariable logistic regression was fitted to compare BP adequacy between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 506 patients (F 42.9%, mean age 48.9 ± 15.2 years) were included and BP was adequate in 440 (87.0%). 1L-PEG-ASC was associated with a higher rate of adequate BP compared to 2L-PEG (89.8% vs. 83.8%, P = 0.048) and higher BBPS score [median 8, interquartile range (IQR): 7-9 vs. 6, IQR: 6-8, P < 0.001]. Male sex ( P = 0.03), previous ileal/colonic surgery ( P = 0.01), and stricturing Crohn's disease (CD) ( P = 0.01) were associated with inadequate BP. At multivariable analysis, 1L-PEG-ASC was a predictor of adequate BP [odds ratios (OR) = 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-2.90, P < 0.05]; whereas male sex (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.90, P = 0.02) and previous ileal/colonic surgery (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.77, P < 0.01) were confirmed as risk factors for inadequate BP.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results from this large real-world cohort highlight the efficiency of 1L-PEG-ASC in providing better BP compared to 2L-PEG. However, further studies are needed to validate our retrospective results and confirm the superiority of 1L-PEG-ASC. Male sex and previous ileal/colonic surgery and stricturing CD were related to poor BP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1127-1134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000003005\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000003005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:关于肠准备(BP)在炎症性肠病(IBD)门诊中使用的数据缺乏,特别是在引入1L-PEG-ASC之后。因此,我们的目的是评估1L-PEG-ASC和2L-PEG之间最有效的血压,并确定IBD人群中血压不足的危险因素。方法:这是一项多中心、回顾性、横断面研究,纳入了年龄在bb10 - 16岁之间的IBD患者,他们在2021年1月至2022年12月期间接受了门诊分剂量结肠镜检查。采用波士顿肠准备量表(BBPS)测定血压是否充足。采用多变量logistic回归比较1L-PEG-ASC和2L-PEG之间的血压充分性。结果:共纳入506例患者(f42.9%,平均年龄48.9±15.2岁),440例患者(87.0%)血压正常。与2L-PEG相比,1L-PEG-ASC与更高的血压适足率(89.8%比83.8%,P = 0.048)和更高的BBPS评分相关[中位数8,四分位间距(IQR): 7-9比6,IQR: 6-8, P < 0.001]。男性(P = 0.03)、既往回肠/结肠手术(P = 0.01)和狭窄性克罗恩病(CD) (P = 0.01)与血压不足相关。在多变量分析中,1L-PEG-ASC是足够血压的预测因子[比值比(OR) = 1.70, 95%可信区间(CI): 1.00-2.90, P < 0.05];而男性(OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.90, P = 0.02)和既往回肠/结肠手术(OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.77, P < 0.01)被证实为血压不足的危险因素。结论:这个大型现实队列的结果突出了1L-PEG-ASC在提供更好的血压方面的效率,而不是2L-PEG。然而,需要进一步的研究来验证我们的回顾性结果,并确认1L-PEG-ASC的优越性。男性、既往回肠/结肠手术和狭窄性乳糜泻与低血压有关。
A multicenter study on bowel preparation in inflammatory bowel disease patients: comparison between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG regimens in an outpatient setting.
Background and aims: There is a paucity of data on which bowel preparation (BP) to use in an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outpatient setting, in particular after the introduction of 1L-PEG-ASC. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the most effective BP between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG and to identify risk factors for inadequate BP in this IBD population.
Methods: This is a multicentric, retrospective, cross-sectional study including IBD patients aged >16 years, who underwent outpatient split-dose colonoscopy between January 2021 and December 2022. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to determine the adequacy of BP. Multivariable logistic regression was fitted to compare BP adequacy between 1L-PEG-ASC and 2L-PEG.
Results: Overall, 506 patients (F 42.9%, mean age 48.9 ± 15.2 years) were included and BP was adequate in 440 (87.0%). 1L-PEG-ASC was associated with a higher rate of adequate BP compared to 2L-PEG (89.8% vs. 83.8%, P = 0.048) and higher BBPS score [median 8, interquartile range (IQR): 7-9 vs. 6, IQR: 6-8, P < 0.001]. Male sex ( P = 0.03), previous ileal/colonic surgery ( P = 0.01), and stricturing Crohn's disease (CD) ( P = 0.01) were associated with inadequate BP. At multivariable analysis, 1L-PEG-ASC was a predictor of adequate BP [odds ratios (OR) = 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-2.90, P < 0.05]; whereas male sex (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.90, P = 0.02) and previous ileal/colonic surgery (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.77, P < 0.01) were confirmed as risk factors for inadequate BP.
Conclusion: Results from this large real-world cohort highlight the efficiency of 1L-PEG-ASC in providing better BP compared to 2L-PEG. However, further studies are needed to validate our retrospective results and confirm the superiority of 1L-PEG-ASC. Male sex and previous ileal/colonic surgery and stricturing CD were related to poor BP.
期刊介绍:
European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology publishes papers reporting original clinical and scientific research which are of a high standard and which contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology.
The journal publishes three types of manuscript: in-depth reviews (by invitation only), full papers and case reports. Manuscripts submitted to the journal will be accepted on the understanding that the author has not previously submitted the paper to another journal or had the material published elsewhere. Authors are asked to disclose any affiliations, including financial, consultant, or institutional associations, that might lead to bias or a conflict of interest.