An Enhanced High-Volume Preparation for Colonoscopy Is Not Better Than a Conventional Low-Volume One in Patients at Risk of Poor Bowel Cleansing: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Antonio Z Gimeno-García, Goretti Hernández, José Luis Baute Dorta, Cristina Reygosa, Raquel de la Barreda, Alberto Hernandez-Bustabad, Carla Amaral, Yaiza Cedrés, Rocío Del Castillo, David Nicolás-Pérez, Alejandro Jiménez, Onofre Alarcon-Fernández, Manuel Hernandez-Guerra, Rafael Romero, Inmaculada Alonso, Yanira González, Zaida Adrian, Domingo Hernandez, Laura Ramos, Marta Carrillo, Vanessa Felipe, Anjara Hernández, Consuelo Rodríguez-Jiménez, Enrique Quintero, Antonio Z Gimeno-García, Goretti Hernández, José Luis Baute Dorta, Cristina Reygosa, Raquel de la Barreda, Alberto Hernandez-Bustabad, Carla Amaral, Yaiza Cedrés, Rocío Del Castillo, David Nicolás-Pérez, Alejandro Jiménez, Onofre Alarcon-Fernández, Manuel Hernandez-Guerra, Rafael Romero, Inmaculada Alonso, Yanira González, Zaida Adrian, Domingo Hernandez, Laura Ramos, Marta Carrillo, Vanessa Felipe, Anjara Hernández, Consuelo Rodríguez-Jiménez, Enrique Quintero

Abstract

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that an enhanced bowel preparation strategy (EBS) improves colonic cleansing in patients at high risk for inadequate bowel cleansing (HRI). Methods: This prospective randomized clinical trial included consecutive HRI patients referred for outpatient colonoscopy between February and October 2019. HRI was considered if patients scored >1.225 according to a previously validated bowel-cleansing predictive score. HRI patients were randomized (1:1) to a low-volume conventional bowel cleansing strategy (CBS) (1-day low residue diet (LRD) plus 2 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid) or to an EBS (3-day LRD plus 10 mg oral bisacodyl plus 4 L PEG). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was used to assess the quality of cleanliness. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were performed. A sample size of 130 patients per group was estimated to reach a 15% difference in favor of EBP. Results: A total of 253 HRI patients were included (mean age 69.8 ± 9.5 years, 51.8% women). No statistically significant differences were found in the BBPS scale between the two groups in the ITT analysis (CBS 76.8% vs. EBS 79.7%, P = 0.58) or PP analysis (CBS 78% vs. EBS 84.3%, P = 0.21), risk difference 2.9% (95% CI-7.26 to 39.16) in the ITT analysis, or risk difference 6.3% (95% CI-3.48 to 16.08) in PP analysis. No differences in preparation tolerance, compliance, adverse effects, or colonoscopy findings were found. Conclusion: EBS is not superior to CBS in hard-to-prepare patients. (EUDRACT: 2017-000787-15, NCT03830489). Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03830489.

Keywords: bowel cleansing predictive score; enhanced bowel preparation; hard to prepare patients; high volume bowel preparation; low volume bowel preparation.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2021 Gimeno-García, Hernández, Baute Dorta, Reygosa, de la Barreda, Hernandez-Bustabad, Amaral, Cedrés, del Castillo, Nicolás-Pérez, Jiménez, Alarcon-Fernández, Hernandez-Guerra, Romero, Alonso, González, Adrian, Hernandez, Ramos, Carrillo, Felipe, Hernández, Rodríguez-Jiménez and Quintero.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart.

References

    1. Atkin W, Wooldrage K, Parkin DM, Kralj-Hans I, MacRae E, Shah U, et al. . Long term effects of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening after 17 years of follow-up: the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening randomised controlled trial. Lancet. (2017) 389:1299–311. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30396-3
    1. Jover R, Herraiz M, Alarcon O, Brullet E, Bujanda L, Bustamante M, et al. . Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy. (2012) 44:444–51. 10.1055/s-0032-1306690
    1. Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J, Pike IM, Adler DG, Fennerty MB, et al. . Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. (2015) 81:31–53. 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.058
    1. Dik VK, Moons LM, Huyuk M, van der Schaar P, de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Ter Borg PC, et al. . Predicting inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy in participants receiving split-dose bowel preparation: development and validation of a prediction score. Gastrointest Endosc. (2015) 81:665–72. 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.066
    1. Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Baute JL, Hernandez G, Morales D, Gonzalez-Perez CD, Nicolas-Perez D, et al. . Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation: a validated predictive score. Endoscopy. (2017) 49:536–43. 10.1055/s-0043-101683
    1. Hassan C, Fuccio L, Bruno M, Pagano N, Spada C, Carrara S, et al. . A predictive model identifies patients most likely to have inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2012) 10:501–6. 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.12.037
    1. Spadaccini M, Frazzoni L, Vanella G, East J, Radaelli F, Spada C, et al. . Efficacy and tolerability of high- vs. low-volume split-dose bowel cleansing regimens for colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2020) 18:1454–65. 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.10.044
    1. Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Hernandez G, Aldea A, Nicolas-Perez D, Jimenez A, Carrillo M, et al. . Comparison of two intensive bowel cleansing regimens in patients with previous poor bowel preparation: a randomized controlled study. Am J Gastroenterol. (2017) 112:951–8. 10.1038/ajg.2017.53
    1. Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc. (2009) 69(3 Pt 2):620–5. 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057
    1. Longstreth GF, Thompson WG, Chey WD, Houghton LA, Mearin F, Spiller RC. Functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology. (2006) 130:1480–91. 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.11.061
    1. Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH, Dufrayne F, Bergman G. A novel tableted purgative for colonoscopic preparation: efficacy and safety comparisons with Colyte and Fleet Phospho-Soda. Gastrointest Endosc. (2000) 52:346–52. 10.1067/mge.2000.108480
    1. Hatoum HT, Lin SJ, Joseph RE, Dahdal DN. Validation of a patient satisfaction scale in patients undergoing bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy. Patient. (2016) 9:27–34. 10.1007/s40271-015-0154-8
    1. Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L, Baron TH, Hutter MM, Jacobson BC, et al. . A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc. (2010) 71:446–54. 10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.027
    1. Gimeno-Garcia AZ, de la Barreda Heuser R, Reygosa C, Hernandez A, Mascareno I, Nicolas-Perez D, et al. . Impact of a 1-day versus 3-day low-residue diet on bowel cleansing quality before colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy. (2019) 51:628–36. 10.1055/a-0864-1942
    1. Hassan C, East J, Radaelli F, Spada C, Benamouzig R, Bisschops R, et al. . Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline—update 2019. Endoscopy. (2019) 51:775–94. 10.1055/a-0959-0505
    1. Johnson DA, Barkun AN, Cohen LB, Dominitz JA, Kaltenbach T, Martel M, et al. . Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. (2014) 147:903–24. 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002
    1. Saltzman JR, Cash BD, Pasha SF, Early DS, Muthusamy VR, Khashab MA, et al. . Bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. (2015) 81:781–94. 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.048
    1. Sharara AI, Bou Daher H. Bowel cleansing strategies after suboptimal bowel preparation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2019) 17:1239–41. 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.042
    1. Ancha HR, Spungen AM, Bauman WA, Rosman AS, Shaw S, Hunt KK, et al. . Clinical trial: the efficacy and safety of routine bowel cleansing agents for elective colonoscopy in persons with spinal cord injury—a randomized prospective single-blind study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. (2009) 30:1110–7. 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04147.x
    1. Mussetto A, Frazzoni L, Paggi S, Dari S, Laterza L, Radaelli F, et al. . Split dosing with a low-volume preparation is not inferior to split dosing with a high-volume preparation for bowel cleansing in patients with a history of colorectal resection: a randomized trial. Endoscopy. (2015) 47:917–24. 10.1055/s-0034-1391987
    1. Parente F, Vailati C, Bargiggia S, Manes G, Fontana P, Masci E, et al. . 2-Litre polyethylene glycol-citrate-simethicone plus bisacodyl versus 4-litre polyethylene glycol as preparation for colonoscopy in chronic constipation. Dig Liver Dis. (2015) 47:857–63. 10.1016/j.dld.2015.06.008

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel