Comparison Efficiency of Bowel Preparation before Colonoscopy between Polyethylene Glycol and Sodium Phosphate Solution for Patient Colonoscopy in YANGTALAD HOSPITAL.
Keywords:
colonoscopy, colorectal cancer, bowel preparation, laxative drugsAbstract
This study was retrospective study. For patients at risk who were positive for iFOBT and underwent colonoscopy at Yangtalat Hospital from July to August 2024. The patients were divided to the type laxative drugs into 2 groups. Group Polyethylene Glycol 142 patients and group Sodium Phosphate 128 patients. Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics (Chi-square test, Independent t-test) were used to analyze the data. The statistically significance was set at 0.05 (P value < 0.05).
Results: The PEG group patients had good bowel cleanliness in 57.04%, polyp was detected in 42.25%, diverticulosis in 33.80%, carcinoma in 0.70%, hemorrhoid in 16.20%, intubation time was 6.58±3.81 minutes, withdrawal time was 6.89±6.25 minutes, and the cost was 11089.67±5755.41 baht. The NaP group patients had good bowel cleanliness in 64.06%, polyp was detected in 46.09%, diverticulosis in 21.87%, carcinoma in 1.56%, hemorrhoid in 19.53%, intubation time was 5.67±2.47 minutes, withdrawal time was 7.00±6.48 minutes, and the cost was 11893.13±6603.52 baht. Comparing the cleanliness of the bowel of the two groups, there was no statistically significant difference, p=0.297.
References
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2023 Oct 21];68(6):394–424. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30 207593/
Islami F, Goding Sauer A, Miller KD, et al. Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United States. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68(1): 31-54. doi:10.3322/caac.21440
World Health Organization, The Global Cancer Observatory. Thailand. The Global Cancer Observatory, 2020. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/
Winawer SJ, Zauber AG. The advanced adenoma as the primary target of screening. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2002; 12(1): 1-9, v. doi:10.1016/s1052-5157(03)00053-9
Schoen RE, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, Yokochi LA, Church T, Laiyemo AO, et al. Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. N Engl J Med 2012 ;366(25):2345– 57
Chan WK, Saravanan A, Manikam J, Goh KL, Mahadeva S. Appointment waiting times and education level influence the quality of bowel preparation in adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. BMC Gastroenterol 2011;11:86.
Guo R, Wang Y-J, Liu M, Ge J, Zhang L-Y, Ma L, et al. The effect of quality of segmental bowel preparation on adenoma detection rate. BMC Gastroenterol [Internet]. 2019;19(1). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-019- 1019-8
David Kastenberg, Gerald Bertiger, Stuart Brogadi. Bowel preparation quality scales for colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2018 July 14; 24(26): 2833-2843. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i26.2833
Clark BT, Rustagi T, Laine L. What level of bowel prep quality requires early repeat colonoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preparation quality on adenoma detection rate. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109(11):1714–23; quiz 1724.
Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, Levin TR, Burt RW, Johnson DA, Kirk LM, Litlin S, Lieberman DA, Waye JD, Church J, Marshall JB, Riddell RH. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. MultiSociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-1308 [PMID: 12094842 DOI: 1111/ j.1572-0241.2002.05812.x]
Davis GR, Santa Ana CA, Morawski SG, Fordtran JS. Development of a lavage solution associated with minimal water and electrolyte absorption or secretion. Gastroenterology1980; 78:991-5.
ASGE Technology Status Evaluation Report: Colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:1201-9.
Ben-Horin S, Bar-Meir S, Avidan B. The impact of colon cleanliness assessment on endoscopists’ recommendations for follow-up colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:2680-5.
Hassan Cesare et al. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline – Update 2019. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 775–794
Jung Hun Park, Sang Jin Kim, Jong Hee Hyun, Kyung Su Han, Byung Chang Kim, Chang Won Hong et al. Correlation Between Bowel Preparation and the Adenoma Detection Rate in Screening Colonoscopy. Ann Coloproctol 2017;33(3):93-98, https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.3.93
Suh Eun Bae, Kyung-Jo Kim, Jun Bum Eum et al. A Comparison of 2 L of Polyethylene Glycol and 45 mL of Sodium Phosphate versus 4 L of Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleansing: A Prospective Randomized Trial. Gut and Liver, Vol. 7, No. 4, July 2013, pp. 423-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl.2013.7.4.423.
Hardik Shah, Devendra Desai, Hrishikesh Samant et al. Comparison of split-dosing vs non-split (morning) dosing regimen for assessment of quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2014 December 16; 6(12): 606-611. DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v6.i12.606
