Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Frontline Gastroenterol ; 12(4): 265-271, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34249310

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In gastroenterological disorders, iron deficiency (ID) is often treated with intravenous iron. This real-world study assessed the effectiveness and safety of iron isomaltoside (IIM), a high-dose intravenous iron, for the treatment of ID in patients with gastroenterological disorders, as part of a service evaluation and improvement process. METHODS: Medical records of 117 patients with gastroenterological disorders, who received IIM, were examined retrospectively. Study outcomes included dose of IIM (estimated iron need versus actual dose received), number of appointments required to deliver the dose and changes in haemoglobin (Hb) and ferritin at ~1 month and ~6 months post-treatment. Safety was assessed through adverse drug reactions (ADRs). RESULTS: Overall, 76.1% of patients received their estimated iron need; 23.9% were underdosed. The mean (SD) iron dose was 1317 (409.7) mg; 62.4% of patients received their dose in one appointment. From baseline, mean (SD) Hb increased by 20.9 (15.4) g/L at 1 month post-treatment (p<0.0001) and by 22.0 (17.9) g/L at 6 months post-treatment (p<0.0001). Mean (SD) baseline ferritin was 26.6 (37.8) µg/L, which increased to 234.6 (142.9) µg/L at 1 month post-treatment (p<0.0001), and remained increased at 6 months post-treatment (122.8 (99.2) µg/L; p<0.0001). A substantial proportion of patients were non-anaemic at 1 month (57.5%) and 6 months (61.8%) post-treatment. At both post-treatment timepoints, the proportion of non-anaemic patients was higher in those receiving their total iron need versus those who were underdosed. No serious ADRs were reported. CONCLUSION: IIM was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with gastroenterological disorders. This real-world study highlights the importance of administering the full iron need to maximise treatment response.

2.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 46(7): 595-601, 2012 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22334219

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: High-quality video colonoscopy requires adequate preparation of the bowel to ensure both adequate procedure completion rates and polyp detection rates. We sought to examine our practice to determine which bowel preparation cleansed most effectively in our patients. AIM: A prospective audit of the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of low-volume polyethylene glycol (2-L Moviprep; Norgine Pharmaceuticals) versus standard volume polyethylene glycol (4-L KleanPrep; Norgine Pharmaceuticals) versus magnesium citrate (Citramag; Sanochemia UK Ltd.) plus stimulant laxative as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. SETTING: District General Hospital. PATIENTS: Patients attending for day case colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall cleansing grades of preparations used: patient compliance, taste, and acceptability. METHODS: A prospective audit of patient experience of taking bowel preparation and blinded colonic scoring assessment of bowel cleansing of each of the tested regimes. RESULTS: A total of 258 (female,138; 53.5%) patients were recruited, 91 in the KleanPrep group (F:45, 49.5%), 86 patients in the Moviprep group (female, 45; 52.3%), and 81 in the Senna/Citramag group (female, 44; 54.3%). Significantly more patients were unable to take the prescribed dose of KleanPrep when compared with the other 2 regimes (19.6%; P<0.0001 vs. Moviprep; P<0.0001 vs. Senna/Citramag). A total of 45.65% of patients reported KleanPrep as tasting unpleasant. This was significantly more than both Moviprep (10.47%; P=0.008) and Senna/Citramag (9.88%; P<0.0001). The overall cleansing efficacy across the 3 groups (those with grades A or B) was 73.9%, 74.5%, and 86.5% for KleanPrep, Moviprep, and Senna/Citramag, respectively. In this series Senna/Citramag proved significantly better at bowel cleansing than KleanPrep (P<0.05) and it showed a trend toward better cleansing when compared with Moviprep (P=0.08). LIMITATIONS: Nonrandomized trial. Split-dosing regime for morning and afternoon lists may have confounded results. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, low-volume PEG (Moviprep) and Senna/Citramag combination were better tolerated than large volume PEG with Senna/Citramag providing superior mucosal cleansing.


Assuntos
Catárticos , Ácido Cítrico , Colonoscopia/métodos , Laxantes , Compostos Organometálicos , Polietilenoglicóis , Extrato de Senna , Adulto , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Catárticos/administração & dosagem , Catárticos/efeitos adversos , Ácido Cítrico/administração & dosagem , Ácido Cítrico/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Laxantes/administração & dosagem , Laxantes/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Compostos Organometálicos/administração & dosagem , Compostos Organometálicos/efeitos adversos , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Cooperação do Paciente , Polietilenoglicóis/administração & dosagem , Polietilenoglicóis/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Extrato de Senna/administração & dosagem , Extrato de Senna/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA