墨西哥总医院结肠镜检查两种肠道准备方案的有效性比较

Yuridia Renata Macias Angeles, Mariel Saraiba Reyes, Rafael Antón Tejada García, Viridiana Jiménez Zamora, Víctor García Guerrero, Oscar Bellacetin Figueroa, Fernando Bernal Sahagún, Rosario Valdés Lías, Adalberto Corral Medina, Francisco Vasques Bustamante, Bernardo Carranza Gallardo, Ángel Mario Zarate Guzmán
{"title":"墨西哥总医院结肠镜检查两种肠道准备方案的有效性比较","authors":"Yuridia Renata Macias Angeles,&nbsp;Mariel Saraiba Reyes,&nbsp;Rafael Antón Tejada García,&nbsp;Viridiana Jiménez Zamora,&nbsp;Víctor García Guerrero,&nbsp;Oscar Bellacetin Figueroa,&nbsp;Fernando Bernal Sahagún,&nbsp;Rosario Valdés Lías,&nbsp;Adalberto Corral Medina,&nbsp;Francisco Vasques Bustamante,&nbsp;Bernardo Carranza Gallardo,&nbsp;Ángel Mario Zarate Guzmán","doi":"10.1016/j.endomx.2015.08.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Colonoscopy is the “gold standard” for the detection of polyps and precancerous lesions. Adequate cleansing is essential for an effective colonoscopy. Intestinal preparations should be effective, safe and well tolerated by the patient.</p></div><div><h3>Objetive</h3><p>To compare the bowel cleansing efficacy, tolerability and cost of 2 colonic preparations: 4<!--> <!-->l polyethylene glycol vs. 2<!--> <!-->l polyethylene<!--> <!-->+<!--> <!-->10<!--> <!-->mg bisacodyl.</p></div><div><h3>Material and Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional, prolective, comparative and analytical study was conducted including patients referred for colonoscopy due to any indication, aged between 18 and 85 years. We excluded patients with a history of allergy to the formulations used, heart failure and resection of a segment of the colon. Two groups were formed by simple randomisation: group 1 received the standard preparation of 4 litres of polyethylene glycol (PEG), and group 2 received 2<!--> <!-->l PEG and 10<!--> <!-->mg bisacodyl.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included a total of 92 patients, of which 18 were ruled out. Out of the final 74 patients, 37 (50%) were male and 50% were female. Group 1 included 39 patients (53%) and group 2 included 35 patients (47%), and the mean age was 50 years. Tolerance to the preparation was measured using a Likert scale, with a mean result of 4 points in both groups. Efficacy was measured using a Boston scale, with a value of 7.36 in group 1 and of 7.43 in group 2 (RR 0.063).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The study found no significant differences in colon cleansing and tolerance between groups. The preparation containing bisacodyl was less expensive.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100465,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopia","volume":"27 3","pages":"Pages 98-103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.endomx.2015.08.001","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparación de la efectividad de 2 esquemas de preparación intestinal para colonoscopia en el Hospital General de México\",\"authors\":\"Yuridia Renata Macias Angeles,&nbsp;Mariel Saraiba Reyes,&nbsp;Rafael Antón Tejada García,&nbsp;Viridiana Jiménez Zamora,&nbsp;Víctor García Guerrero,&nbsp;Oscar Bellacetin Figueroa,&nbsp;Fernando Bernal Sahagún,&nbsp;Rosario Valdés Lías,&nbsp;Adalberto Corral Medina,&nbsp;Francisco Vasques Bustamante,&nbsp;Bernardo Carranza Gallardo,&nbsp;Ángel Mario Zarate Guzmán\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.endomx.2015.08.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Colonoscopy is the “gold standard” for the detection of polyps and precancerous lesions. Adequate cleansing is essential for an effective colonoscopy. Intestinal preparations should be effective, safe and well tolerated by the patient.</p></div><div><h3>Objetive</h3><p>To compare the bowel cleansing efficacy, tolerability and cost of 2 colonic preparations: 4<!--> <!-->l polyethylene glycol vs. 2<!--> <!-->l polyethylene<!--> <!-->+<!--> <!-->10<!--> <!-->mg bisacodyl.</p></div><div><h3>Material and Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional, prolective, comparative and analytical study was conducted including patients referred for colonoscopy due to any indication, aged between 18 and 85 years. We excluded patients with a history of allergy to the formulations used, heart failure and resection of a segment of the colon. Two groups were formed by simple randomisation: group 1 received the standard preparation of 4 litres of polyethylene glycol (PEG), and group 2 received 2<!--> <!-->l PEG and 10<!--> <!-->mg bisacodyl.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included a total of 92 patients, of which 18 were ruled out. Out of the final 74 patients, 37 (50%) were male and 50% were female. Group 1 included 39 patients (53%) and group 2 included 35 patients (47%), and the mean age was 50 years. Tolerance to the preparation was measured using a Likert scale, with a mean result of 4 points in both groups. Efficacy was measured using a Boston scale, with a value of 7.36 in group 1 and of 7.43 in group 2 (RR 0.063).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The study found no significant differences in colon cleansing and tolerance between groups. The preparation containing bisacodyl was less expensive.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopia\",\"volume\":\"27 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 98-103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.endomx.2015.08.001\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188989315000524\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188989315000524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

结肠镜检查是检测息肉和癌前病变的“金标准”。充分的清洁对于有效的结肠镜检查至关重要。肠道制剂应有效、安全且患者耐受性良好。目的比较两种结肠制剂:4 l聚乙二醇与2 l聚乙烯+10 mg双沙可基的肠道清洁效果、耐受性和成本。材料和方法进行了一项横断面、前瞻性、比较和分析研究,包括因任何适应症而转诊进行结肠镜检查的患者,年龄在18至85岁之间。我们排除了对所用配方有过敏史、心力衰竭和结肠切除史的患者。通过简单的随机分组形成两组:第1组接受4升聚乙二醇(PEG)的标准制剂,第2组接受2升PEG和10 mg双沙可基。结果本研究共纳入92例患者,其中18例被排除在外。在最后74名患者中,37名(50%)为男性,50%为女性。第一组包括39名患者(53%),第二组包括35名患者(47%),平均年龄为50岁。使用Likert量表测量制剂的耐受性,两组的平均结果均为4分。疗效采用波士顿量表进行测量,第1组为7.36,第2组为7.43(RR 0.063)。结论研究发现,两组在结肠清洁和耐受性方面没有显著差异。含有双氨基水杨酸酯的制剂价格较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparación de la efectividad de 2 esquemas de preparación intestinal para colonoscopia en el Hospital General de México

Introduction

Colonoscopy is the “gold standard” for the detection of polyps and precancerous lesions. Adequate cleansing is essential for an effective colonoscopy. Intestinal preparations should be effective, safe and well tolerated by the patient.

Objetive

To compare the bowel cleansing efficacy, tolerability and cost of 2 colonic preparations: 4 l polyethylene glycol vs. 2 l polyethylene + 10 mg bisacodyl.

Material and Methods

A cross-sectional, prolective, comparative and analytical study was conducted including patients referred for colonoscopy due to any indication, aged between 18 and 85 years. We excluded patients with a history of allergy to the formulations used, heart failure and resection of a segment of the colon. Two groups were formed by simple randomisation: group 1 received the standard preparation of 4 litres of polyethylene glycol (PEG), and group 2 received 2 l PEG and 10 mg bisacodyl.

Results

The study included a total of 92 patients, of which 18 were ruled out. Out of the final 74 patients, 37 (50%) were male and 50% were female. Group 1 included 39 patients (53%) and group 2 included 35 patients (47%), and the mean age was 50 years. Tolerance to the preparation was measured using a Likert scale, with a mean result of 4 points in both groups. Efficacy was measured using a Boston scale, with a value of 7.36 in group 1 and of 7.43 in group 2 (RR 0.063).

Conclusions

The study found no significant differences in colon cleansing and tolerance between groups. The preparation containing bisacodyl was less expensive.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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