ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the efficacy and comfort of oral polyethylene glycol at different time for painless colonoscopy preparation. Methods According to time of oral compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder, 173 painless colonoscopy patients were divided into group A, group B and group C. Patients in group A took 4 boxes of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 22:00 on day 1 before the check, the time of painless colonoscopy is 8:30 ~ 10:30. Group B patients took 1 box of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 20:00 on day 1 before the check and took 3 boxes at 5:00 am on check day, the time of painless colonoscopy is 10:30 ~ 12:30. Group C patients took 1 box of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 20:00 on day 1 before the check and took 3 boxes at 7:00 am on check day, the time of painless colonoscopy is 13:30 ~ 15:30. At last, we compare the colon cleanliness and comfort of patients among the three groups. Results There was no significant difference in instetinal cleanliness among the 3 groups (P > 0.05), but there was greatly significant difference in subjective tolerance among 3 groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion The 3 methods of having boxes of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte power all have the satisfying effect for colonic preparation, but fractionated dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte power provides a better tolerance for bowel preparation of painless colonscopy.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the role of defoamer enema combined with bellym assage on the colonic preparation in elderly patients with constipation. Methods One hundred patients were divided into two groups by random number table method, the experimental group and the control group with 50 cases each. Patients in the control group were told to drink polyethyleneglycolelectrolytesolution 3000 ml. Patients in the experimental group were told to drink polyethyleneglycolelectrolytesolution 2000 ml. After medicinepre paration, the patients of experimental group were given defoamer enema. After that, they were undertaken counterclockwise massage for10 mins, then massageing clockwise until defecation. Results 14 patients with oral catharsis drugs failed to give up check, 46 cases of intervention group and 40 cases of control group finally complete intestinal preparation and colonoscopy. Intervention group patients after bowel preparation before the incidence of abdominal distension, abdominal pain were 6.52% (3/46), 8.70%(4/46), lower than the control group 65.00% (26/40), 25.00% (10/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2= 32.74, 4.17, P< 0.05). Percent of pass was 65.22%(30/46) for intestinal preparation intervention group, significantly higher than the control group 35.00% (14/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2= 7.82, P< 0.05). Intervention group intestinal cleanliness ratings of Ottawa total score was 4.00 (4.00), which was lower than the control group 7.00 (4.50), the difference was statistically significant (Z= 3.80, P< 0.05). Endoscopic check process, the intervention group arrived at the terminal ileum and mirror back time were 7.00 (3.00) and 9.00 (1.00) min, were less than 9.00(6.50) and 10.50 (3.00) min in the control group, the difference was statistically significant (Z= 2.09, 4.53, P< 0.05). Intervention group of colons polyps detection rate was 67.39% (31/46), higher than that of control group 30.00% (12/40), the difference was statistically significant (χ2 = 11.97, P< 0.05). Conclusions The bowel preparation with defoamer enema will enhance the intestinal tract cleaness and the detection rate of polyps in elderly patients with constipation.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the efficacy and comfort of oral polyethylene glycol at different time for painless colonoscopy preparation. Methods According to time of oral compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder, 173 painless colonoscopy patients were divided into group A, group B and group C. Patients in group A took 4 boxes of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 22:00 on day 1 before the check, the time of painless colonoscopy is 8:30 ~ 10:30. Group B patients took 1 box of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 20:00 on day 1 before the check and took 3 boxes at 5:00 am on check day, the time of painless colonoscopy is 10:30 ~ 12:30. Group C patients took 1 box of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder for colonic preparation at 20:00 on day 1 before the check and took 3 boxes at 7:00 am on check day, the time of painless colonoscopy is 13:30 ~ 15:30. At last, we compare the colon cleanliness and comfort of patients among the three groups. Results There was no significant difference in instetinal cleanliness among the 3 groups (P > 0.05), but there was greatly significant difference in subjective tolerance among 3 groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion The 3 methods of having boxes of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte power all have the satisfying effect for colonic preparation, but fractionated dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte power provides a better tolerance for bowel preparation of painless colonscopy.
ABSTRACT
Objective To verify and evaluate the efficacy and safety of PEG-4000 electrolyte lavage solution in endoscopy preparation. Methods A multicenter open randomized controlled clinical study of 211 patients taking PEG-4000 electrolyte or mannitol in colonoendoscopy preparation. The overall evaluation of colonic preparation was the primary efficacy criterion. The investigator recorded any adverse event to assess the safety. Results The total effective rate of overall colonic preparation of study group was 92. 45% (98/ 106) , that of mannitol group was 80% (84/105). The study group showed more effective than control group with statistical significance (P = 0.016). The adverse event incidence of study group was 8.49%. There were 6 patients complained of nausea and vomiting, 3 patients showed abnormal laboratory results after administration. All the events relieved in short period and have no influence on examination. There was no serious adverse event in this group. The incidence of adverse event in mannitol group was 14. 29% (15/105 ). Four patients showed gastrointestinal symptoms and 1 showed chest suppression. Abnormal laboratory results were found in 10 patients. There was 1 serious adverse event occurred in control group. The difference between 2 groups had no statistical significance. Conclusion PEG-4000 electrolyte is a safe and effective drug in colonic preparation before clinical colonic examination or surgery.