Blog
About

2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy of 1.2 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparations

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          BACKGROUND

          A low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution that combines ascorbic acid with PEG-based electrolyte solution (PEG-ASC) is gaining mainstream acceptance for bowel preparation due to reduced volume and improved taste. Although several reports showed that bowel preparation with PEG-ASC volume lower than 2.0 L with laxative agents could be an alternative to traditional preparation regimen, the cleansing protocols have not been fully investigated.

          AIM

          To evaluate the cleansing efficacy of 1.2 L PEG-ASC solution comparing with 2.0 L PEG electrolyte (PEG-ELS) for bowel preparations.

          METHODS

          A randomized, single-blinded, open-label, single-center, non-inferiority study was conducted. In total, 312 Japanese adult patients (aged > 18 years) who underwent colonoscopy were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to bowel lavage with either 1.2 L of PEG-ASC solution with at least 0.6 L of an additional clear fluid (1.2 L PEG-ASC group) or 2.0 L of PEG-ELS (PEG-ELS group). Then, 48 mg of sennoside was administered at bedtime on the day before colonoscopy, and the designated drug solution was administered at the hospital on the day of colonoscopy. Bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). The volume of fluid intake and required time for bowel preparation were evaluated. Furthermore, compliance, patient tolerance, and overall acceptability were evaluated using a patient questionnaire, which was assessed using a visual analog scale.

          RESULTS

          In total, 291 patients (1.2 L PEG-ASC group, 148; PEG-ELS group, 143) completed the study. There was no significant difference in successful cleansing, defined as a BBPS score ≥ 2 in each segment, between the two groups (1.2 L PEG-ASC group, 91.9%; PEG-ELS group, 90.2%; 95%CI: -0.03-0.09). The required time for bowel preparation was significantly shorter (164.95 min ± 68.95 min vs 202.16 min ± 68.69 min, P < 0.001) and the total fluid intake volume was significantly lower (2.23 L ± 0.55 L vs 2.47 L ± 0.56 L, P < 0.001) in the 1.2 L PEG-ASC group than in the PEG-ELS group. Palatability, acceptability of the volume of solution, and overall acceptability evaluated using a patient questionnaire, which was assessed by the visual analog scale, were significantly better in the 1.2 L PEG-ASC group than in the PEG-ELS group (7.70 cm ± 2.57 cm vs 5.80 cm ± 3.24 cm, P < 0.001). No severe adverse event was observed in each group.

          CONCLUSION

          The 1.2 L PEG-ASC solution was non-inferior to the 2.0 L PEG-ELS solution in terms of cleansing efficacy and had better acceptability among Japanese patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Global cancer statistics.

          The global burden of cancer continues to increase largely because of the aging and growth of the world population alongside an increasing adoption of cancer-causing behaviors, particularly smoking, in economically developing countries. Based on the GLOBOCAN 2008 estimates, about 12.7 million cancer cases and 7.6 million cancer deaths are estimated to have occurred in 2008; of these, 56% of the cases and 64% of the deaths occurred in the economically developing world. Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among females, accounting for 23% of the total cancer cases and 14% of the cancer deaths. Lung cancer is the leading cancer site in males, comprising 17% of the total new cancer cases and 23% of the total cancer deaths. Breast cancer is now also the leading cause of cancer death among females in economically developing countries, a shift from the previous decade during which the most common cause of cancer death was cervical cancer. Further, the mortality burden for lung cancer among females in developing countries is as high as the burden for cervical cancer, with each accounting for 11% of the total female cancer deaths. Although overall cancer incidence rates in the developing world are half those seen in the developed world in both sexes, the overall cancer mortality rates are generally similar. Cancer survival tends to be poorer in developing countries, most likely because of a combination of a late stage at diagnosis and limited access to timely and standard treatment. A substantial proportion of the worldwide burden of cancer could be prevented through the application of existing cancer control knowledge and by implementing programs for tobacco control, vaccination (for liver and cervical cancers), and early detection and treatment, as well as public health campaigns promoting physical activity and a healthier dietary intake. Clinicians, public health professionals, and policy makers can play an active role in accelerating the application of such interventions globally.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths.

            In the National Polyp Study (NPS), colorectal cancer was prevented by colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps. We evaluated the long-term effect of colonoscopic polypectomy in a study on mortality from colorectal cancer. We included in this analysis all patients prospectively referred for initial colonoscopy (between 1980 and 1990) at NPS clinical centers who had polyps (adenomas and nonadenomas). The National Death Index was used to identify deaths and to determine the cause of death; follow-up time was as long as 23 years. Mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with adenomas removed was compared with the expected incidence-based mortality from colorectal cancer in the general population, as estimated from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program, and with the observed mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with nonadenomatous polyps (internal control group). Among 2602 patients who had adenomas removed during participation in the study, after a median of 15.8 years, 1246 patients had died from any cause and 12 had died from colorectal cancer. Given an estimated 25.4 expected deaths from colorectal cancer in the general population, the standardized incidence-based mortality ratio was 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.80) with colonoscopic polypectomy, suggesting a 53% reduction in mortality. Mortality from colorectal cancer was similar among patients with adenomas and those with nonadenomatous polyps during the first 10 years after polypectomy (relative risk, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 10.6). These findings support the hypothesis that colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps prevents death from colorectal cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Lessons from hereditary colorectal cancer.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                World J Clin Cases
                WJCC
                World Journal of Clinical Cases
                Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
                2307-8960
                26 February 2019
                26 February 2019
                : 7
                : 4
                : 452-465
                Affiliations
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan
                Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017, Japan. shibatoge-mitsusige@ 123456takamatsu.jrc.or.jp
                Author notes

                Author contributions: Tamaki H was fully involved in the patient management, acquisition and interpretation of data, statistics, drafting, and preparation of final manuscript version; Shibatoge M was contributed to make the conception, study design, interpretation of data and critical review of the final manuscript version; all authors contributed to correction of the clinical data.

                Corresponding author: Mitsushige Shibatoge, MD, PhD, Department of Gastroenterology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, 4-1-3 Ban-cho, Takamatsu, Kagawa 760-0017 Japan. shibatoge-mitsusige@ 123456takamatsu.jrc.or.jp

                Telephone: +81-87-8317101 Fax: +81-87-8347809

                Article
                jWJCC.v7.i4.pg452
                10.12998/wjcc.v7.i4.452
                6397816
                ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

                This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.

                Categories
                Randomized Controlled Trial

                Comments

                Comment on this article