Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Rev. chil. cir ; 70(3): 224-232, 2018. tab, graf, ilus
Artículo en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-959375

RESUMEN

Resumen Introducción La efectividad de la colonoscopia depende de múltiples factores, destacando la calidad de preparación intestinal y la tolerabilidad que tenga el paciente a la preparación administrada. Objetivo Comparar dos agentes de preparación intestinal, el polietilenglicol (PEG) y el picosulfato de sodiocitrato de magnesio (PSCM) en términos de efectividad y tolerabilidad de la preparación. Pacientes y Método Ensayo clínico aleatorizado en pacientes ambulatorios sometidos a colonoscopia en Clínica INDISA. Evaluando efectividad y tolerabilidad con el Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) y cuestionario de Lawrence [compuesto por escala Likert, dos preguntas cualitativas y escala visual análoga (EVA)], respectivamente. Resultados 189 pacientes, de los cuales 123 se aleatorizaron a PEG y 66 a PSCM. El BBPS en los pacientes que utilizaron PEG, la media fue 7,51 (DS 1,66) y con PSCM fue 7,12 (DS 1,71) (p = 0,111). Al analizar la tolerabilidad con escala Likert, la media con PEG fue 0,94 (DS 0,68) y con PSCM fue 0,63 (DS 0,61) (p = 0,0004). La EVA con PEG tuvo una media de 7,68 (DS 2,4) y con PSCM de 9,04 (DS 1,59) (p < 0,0001). Al preguntar ausentismo laboral, no hubo diferencias significativas en ambos grupos y al preguntar si ocuparía la misma preparación en una futura colonoscopia, hubo significancia estadística a favor del PSCM (p = 0,026). Conclusión No encontramos diferencias en la efectividad de preparación intestinal al comparar PEG y PSCM, sin embargo, el PSCM es mejor tolerado.


Introduction The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on multiple factors, being two of the most important ones an adequate bowel preparation and the patient's tolerability to the preparation. Objectives Compare effectiveness and tolerability of two bowel preparation agents, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC). Patients and Methods Randomized clinical trial on outpatients that went into colonoscopy in INDISA Clinic. We evaluated effectiveness and tolerability with Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) and Lawrence questionnaire [composed by Likert scale, two qualitative questions and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain], respectively. Results 189 patients, 123 were randomized to PEG and 66 to SPMC. BBPS average in patients in the PEG branch was 7.51 (SD 1.66) and for SPMC 7.12 (SD 1.71) (p = 0.111). Likert scale for evaluating tolerability average for PEG was 0.94 (SD 0.68) and for SPMC 0.63 (SD 0.61) (p = 0.0004). VAS scale for PEG had an average of 7.68 (SD 2.4) and for PSCM 9.04 (SD 1.59) (p < 0.0001). When we asked for workplace absenteeism, there were no significant differences between both groups and when we asked about using the same intestinal preparation in a future colonoscopy there was statistical significance in favor to SPMC (p = 0.026). Conclusions No differences were noted on effectiveness between the PEG and SPMC bowel preparations. Nevertheless, SPMC appeared to be better tolerated by patients.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Compuestos Organometálicos/administración & dosificación , Polietilenglicoles/administración & dosificación , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Colonoscopía/métodos , Citratos/administración & dosificación , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Cuidados Preoperatorios/métodos , Método Simple Ciego , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Satisfacción del Paciente
2.
Rev. gastroenterol. Perú ; 36(4): 293-297, oct.-dic. 2016. ilus, tab
Artículo en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-991199

RESUMEN

Objetivos: El objetivo del presente estudio es comparar la preparación adecuada del colon con manitol y picosulfato sódico. Evaluar la aceptación de los pacientes, los efectos secundarios y la capacidad de limpieza. Materiales y métodos: Este es un estudio no aleatorio, prospectivo, ciego, en que el evaluador no tenía información sobre la preparación aplicada. La muestra obtenida se dividió en dos grupos de acuerdo con la preparación adecuada del colon, con 153 pacientes preparados con manitol al 10% y 84 pacientes con picosulfato sódico. La evaluación de la preparación se realizó usando la Escala de Boston (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale - BBP) a través de un sistema de puntuación para cada región del colon puntuada con 3 puntos: derecha, izquierda y colon transverso. Resultados: De los 237 pacientes que fueron evaluados, 146 (61,60%) eran mujeres y 91 (38,4%) eran hombres. En el grupo que utilizó manitol, 98 (64,05%) eran mujeres y 55 (35,95%) eran varones. Entre los pacientes que utilizaron picosulfato sódico, 48 (57,14%)eran mujeres y 36 (42,86%) eran hombres, sin diferencias estadísticas de ambos grupos (p>0,32). Teniendo en cuenta que con la adecuada preparación del colon y con puntuación de 6 puntos en la Escala de Boston, la preparación intestinal fue satisfactoria en ambos grupos. El 93% de los pacientes que utilizaron manitol y el 81% de los pacientes que utilizaron picosulfato sódico tenían preparación adecuada (puntuación de 6). La puntuación media en la preparación con manitol fue de 9 y en la preparación con picosulfato sódico fue de 7. No hubo diferencias significativas entre ambos grupos. Conclusión: Ambas preparaciones, demostraron ser seguras y eficaces para la limpieza del intestino, de acuerdo con la Escala de Boston, así como, la aceptabilidad de los pacientes y libre de complicaciones


Objectives: The purpose of the present study is to compare intestinal preparation with mannitol and sodium picosulphate, assessing patient’s acceptance, side effects and cleaning capacity. Material and methods: This is a prospective, nom randomized, blind study, in which the evaluator had no information about the preparation applied. The sample obtained was divided into two groups according to the bowel preparation applied, with 153 patients prepared with 10% mannitol and 84 patients with sodium picosulfate. The evaluation of colon preparation was done using the Boston Scale (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale - BBP) through a three-point scoring system for each of the three regions of the colon: right, left and transverse colon. Results: Of the 237 patients that were evaluated, 146 (61.60%) were female and 91 (38.4%) were male. Regarding the group that used mannitol, 98 were female (64.05%) and 55 were male (35.95%). Among the patients who used sodium picosulfate, 48 were female (57.14%) and 36 were male (42.86%), with no statistical differences between both groups (p> 0.32). Considering that an adequate preparation scores ≥ 6 in the Boston Scale, the bowel cleansing preparation was satisfactory in both groups. 93% of the patients who used mannitol and 81% of the patients who used sodium picosulfate had adequate preparation (score of ≥ 6). Moreover, we consider that the average score in the preparation with Mannitol was 9, while the sodium picosulfate score was 7. There were no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion: There is consensus among authors who state that colonoscopy’s safety and success are highly related to the cleansing outcome, regardless of the method used. The same can be observed in the present study, on which both preparations were proved safe and effective for bowel cleansing, according to the Boston scale, as well as accepted by patients and free of complications


Asunto(s)
Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Compuestos Organometálicos/administración & dosificación , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Colonoscopía , Citratos/administración & dosificación , Manitol/administración & dosificación , Compuestos Organometálicos/efectos adversos , Picolinas/efectos adversos , Catárticos/efectos adversos , Método Doble Ciego , Estudios Prospectivos , Citratos/efectos adversos , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Manitol/efectos adversos
3.
Gut and Liver ; : 494-501, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | WPRIM | ID: wpr-149100

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We investigated whether sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) plus bisacodyl compares favorably with conventional polyethylene glycol (PEG) with respect to bowel cleansing adequacy, compliance, and safety. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, prospective, single-blinded study in outpatients undergoing daytime colonoscopies. Patients were randomized into a split preparation SPMC/bisacodyl group and a conventional split PEG group. We compared preparation adequacy using the Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS), ease of use using a modified Likert scale (LS), compliance/satisfaction level using a visual analogue scale (VAS), and safety by monitoring adverse events during the colonoscopy between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 365 patients were evaluated by intention to treat (ITT) analysis, and 319 were evaluated by per protocol (PP) population analysis (153 for SPMC/bisacodyl, 166 for PEG). The mean total BBPS score was not different between the two groups in both the ITT and PP analyses (p>0.05). The mean VAS score for satisfaction and LS score for the ease of use were higher in the SPMC/bisacodyl group (p<0.001). The adverse event rate was lower in the SPMC/bisacodyl group than in the PEG group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The SPMC/bisacodyl treatment was comparable to conventional PEG with respect to bowel preparation adequacy and superior with respect to compliance, satisfaction, and safety.


Asunto(s)
Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Citratos/administración & dosificación , Ácido Cítrico/administración & dosificación , Colon/efectos de los fármacos , Colonoscopía , Combinación de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Laxativos/administración & dosificación , Compuestos Organometálicos/administración & dosificación , Cooperación del Paciente , Satisfacción del Paciente , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Polietilenglicoles/administración & dosificación , Cuidados Preoperatorios/métodos , Método Simple Ciego
4.
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology ; : 268-275, 2014.
Artículo en Inglés | WPRIM | ID: wpr-105915

RESUMEN

Bowel preparation is essential for successful colonoscopy examination, and the most important factor is the bowel preparation agent used. However, selection of a bowel preparation agent invariably involves compromise. Originally, bowel preparation was performed for radiologic and surgical purposes, when the process involved dietary limitations, cathartics, and enemas, which had many side effects. Development of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution led to substantive advancement of bowel preparation; however, despite its effectiveness and safety, the large volume involved, and its salty taste and unpleasant odor reduce compliance. Accordingly, modified PEG solutions requiring consumption of lower volumes and sulfate-free solutions were developed. Aqueous sodium phosphate is more effective and better tolerated than PEG solutions; however, fatal complications have occurred due to water and electrolyte shifts. Therefore, aqueous sodium phosphate was withdrawn by the US Food and Drug Administration, and currently, only sodium phosphate tablets remain available. In addition, oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate are also available, and various studies have reported on adjunctive preparations, such as hyperosmolar or stimulant laxatives, antiemetics, and prokinetics, which are now in various stages of development.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Administración Oral , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Citratos/administración & dosificación , Ácido Cítrico/administración & dosificación , Enfermedades del Colon/diagnóstico , Colonoscopía , Compuestos Organometálicos/administración & dosificación , Fosfatos/administración & dosificación , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Polietilenglicoles/administración & dosificación
5.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 44(3): 244-249, jul.-set. 2007. ilus, tab
Artículo en Inglés | LILACS | ID: lil-467964

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The cleansing of the colon for a colonoscopy exam must be complete so as to allow the visualization and inspection of the intestinal lumen. The ideal cleansing agent should be easily administered, have a low cost, and minimum collateral effects. Sodium picosulfate together with the magnesium citrate is a cathartic stimulant and mannitol is an osmotic laxative, both usually used for this purpose. AIMS: Assess the colon cleanliness comparing the use of mannitol and sodium picosulfate as well as evaluate the level of patient satisfaction, the presence of foam, pain, and abdominal distension in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind study with 80 patients that compared two groups: mannitol (40) and sodium picosulfate (40). Both groups received the same dietary orientation. The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics and Research Committee. The endoscopist was blind to the type of preparation. Outcomes evaluated: level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain and distension, and the duration of the exam. The data was analyzed by means of the chi-squared test for proportions and Mann-Whitney for independent samples. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in relation to the level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain, and the duration of the exam. Fifteen percent of the exams of the mannitol group were interrupted while from the sodium picosulfate group it was 5 percent. The presence of foam was similar for both groups. The average duration for carrying out the exam was 28.44 minutes for the mannitol group and 35.59 minutes for the sodium picosulfate group. Abdominal distension was more frequent in the mannitol group. If they would have to do the same exam, the answer was that 80 percent said yes from the mannitol group and 92.5 percent...


RACIONAL: A limpeza do cólon para o exame de colonoscopia deve ser completa de modo a permitir a visualização e inspeção do lúmen intestinal. O agente de limpeza ideal deveria ser de fácil administração, com baixo custo e com o mínimo de efeitos colaterais. O picosulfato de sódio juntamente com o citrato de magnésio é um estimulante catártico e o manitol é um laxativo osmótico, ambos geralmente utilizados para este propósito. OBJETIVOS: Verificar a limpeza do cólon comparando o uso de manitol e picosulfato de sódio assim como avaliar o nível de satisfação do paciente, presença de espuma, dor e distensão abdominal em pacientes hospitalizados submetidos a colonoscopia. MÉTODOS: Estudo prospectivo, randomizado, simples-cego com 80 pacientes que comparou dois grupos: manitol (40) e picosulfato de sódio (40). Ambos os grupos receberam a mesma orientação dietética. O estudo foi aprovado pelo Comitê de Ética do hospital e pelo Comitê de Pesquisa. O endoscopista foi cego para o tipo de preparo. Desfechos avaliados: nível de limpeza do cólon, satisfação do paciente, presença de espuma, dor e distensão abdominal e tempo de duração do exame. Os dados foram analisados pelas médias de testes qui-quadrado para proporções e Mann-Whitney para amostras independentes. RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença significativa entre os grupos em relação ao nível de limpeza do cólon, satisfação do paciente, presença de espuma, dor abdominal e tempo de exame. Quinze porcento dos exames do grupo manitol foram interrompidos enquanto que grupo picosulfato de sódio foi de 5 por cento. A presença de espuma foi similar em ambos os grupos. A média de duração do exame foi de 28h 44min para o grupo manitol e 35h 59min para o grupo picosulfato de sódio. A distensão abdominal foi mais freqüente no grupo manitol. Se eles tivessem que repetir o exame, a resposta foi de 80 por cento disse sim do grupo manitol e 92,5 por cento do grupo picosulfato de sódio. CONCLUSÕES: A qualidade do...


Asunto(s)
Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Catárticos , Colon , Colonoscopía , Enema , Manitol , Picolinas , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Catárticos/efectos adversos , Colon/efectos de los fármacos , Manitol/administración & dosificación , Manitol/efectos adversos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Picolinas/efectos adversos , Método Simple Ciego , Factores de Tiempo
6.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 41(1): 33-36, jan.-mar. 2004. tab
Artículo en Portugués | LILACS | ID: lil-384767

RESUMEN

RACIONAL: A eficácia do exame colonoscópico depende diretamente da limpeza colônica. Ao contrário do paciente adulto, há poucos relatos na literatura sobre preparo colônico em crianças. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a eficácia do preparo colônico à base de picossulfato sódico e citrato de magnésio em crianças e adolescentes. PACIENTES E MÉTODOS: Realizou-se estudo aberto, prospectivo e consecutivo em crianças maiores de 1 ano, de ambos os sexos, que realizaram colonoscopia por diferentes indicações. Os pacientes receberam a medicação associada à dieta líquida e pastosa sem resíduos no dia anterior ao exame. A eficácia do preparo foi classificada em: Grau I: ótimo; Grau II: bom; Grau III: regular; Grau IV: ruim. RESULTADOS: A idade variou de 12 meses a 16 anos e 1 mês (mediana: 6 anos e 6 meses), sendo 54,3 por cento do sexo masculino. O preparo foi feito conforme a orientação em 37/46 (80,4 por cento) dos pacientes, sendo que 9 não fizeram a dieta adequadamente e 22/46 (47,8 por cento) referiram efeitos colaterais. A eficácia do preparo foi: GI em 41,3 por cento, GII em 52,2 por cento, GIII em 6,5 por cento e GIV em 0 por cento. CONCLUSAO: Preparo intestinal com picossulfato sódico e citrato de magnésio é eficiente e prático, podendo ser recomendado de rotina nos exames de colonoscopia em crianças e adolescentes.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Preescolar , Niño , Adolescente , Colon , Colonoscopía , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Ácido Cítrico/administración & dosificación , Compuestos Organometálicos/administración & dosificación , Picolinas/administración & dosificación , Estudios Prospectivos , Irrigación Terapéutica
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA