Multicenter, randomized study to optimize bowel preparation for colon capsule endoscopy.

AIM: To assess the cleansing efficacy and safety of a new Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) bowel preparation regimen. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two CCE regimens. Subjects were asymptomatic and average risk for colorectal cancer. The second generation CCE system (PillCam® COLON 2; Medtronic, Yoqneam, Israel) was utilized. Preparation regimens differed in the 1st and 2nd boosts with the Study regimen using oral sulfate solution (89 mL) with diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution ("diatrizoate solution") (boost 1 = 60 mL, boost 2 = 30 mL) and the Control regimen oral sulfate solution (89 mL) alone. The primary outcome was overall and segmental colon cleansing. Secondary outcomes included safety, polyp detection, colonic transit, CCE completion and capsule excretion ≤ 12 h. RESULTS: Both regimens had similar cleansing efficacy for the whole colon (Adequate: Study = 75.9%, Control = 77.3%; P = 0.88) and individual segments. In the Study group, CCE completion was superior (Study = 90.9%, Control = 76.9%; P = 0.048) and colonic transit was more often < 40 min (Study = 21.8%, Control = 4%; P = 0.0073). More Study regimen subjects experienced adverse events (Study = 19.4%, Control = 3.4%; P = 0.0061), and this difference did not appear related to diatrizoate solution. Adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature and no serious adverse events related either to the bowel preparation regimen or the capsule were observed. There was a trend toward higher polyp detection with the Study regimen, but this did not achieve statistical significance for any size category. Mean transit time through the entire gastrointestinal tract, from ingestion to excretion, was shorter with the Study regimen while mean colonic transit times were similar for both study groups. CONCLUSION: A CCE bowel preparation regimen using oral sulfate solution and diatrizoate solution as a boost agent is effective, safe, and achieved superior CCE completion.

An optimized patient-reported ulcerative colitis disease activity measure derived from the Mayo score and the simple clinical colitis activity index.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for simple, noninvasive patient-driven disease assessment instruments in ulcerative colitis (UC). We sought to further assess and refine the previous described 6-point Mayo score. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 282 UC patients was conducted assessing the correlation of the 2 patient-reported Mayo score components (6-point Mayo score) with the simple clinical colitis activity index (SCCAI) and a single Likert scale of patient-reported disease activity. Spearman's correlation, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curves (AUC) were calculated. A separate validation study in 59 UC patients was also conducted. RESULTS: Participants predominantly had long-standing disease (83%) and were in self-reported remission (63%). The 6-point Mayo score correlated well with the SCCAI (rho = 0.71; P < 0.0001) and patient-reported disease activity (rho = 0.65; P < 0.0001). Using a cutpoint of 1.5, the 6-point Mayo score had 83% sensitivity and 72% specificity for patient-defined remission, and 89% sensitivity and 67% specificity for SCCAI-defined remission (score, <2.5). The 6-point Mayo score and SCCAI had similar accuracy of predicting patient-defined remission (AUC = 0.84 and 0.87, respectively). Addition of the SCCAI general well-being question to the 6-point Mayo improved the predictive ability for patient-defined remission; and a new weighted score had an AUC of 0.89 in the development cohort and 0.93 in the validation cohort. The optimal cutpoint was 1.6. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-reported UC severity index that includes stool frequency, bleeding, and general well-being accurately measures clinical disease activity without requiring direct physician contact.