Feasibility of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation in Pediatric Urology: Pilot-phase outcomes of a prospective, multi-center study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a fundamental shift in perioperative care that has consistently demonstrated an improved outcome for a wide variety of surgeries in adults but has only limited evidence in the pediatric population. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the success with and barriers to implementation of ERAS in a prospective, multi-center study on patients undergoing complex lower urinary tract reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Centers were directed to implement an ERAS protocol using a multidisciplinary team and quality improvement methodologies. Providers completed pre- and post-pilot surveys. An audit committee met after enrolling the first 5 patients at each center. Pilot-phase outcomes included enrollment of ≥2 patients in the first 6 months of enrollment, completion of 90 days of follow-up, identification of barriers to implementation, and protocol adherence. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled across 8 centers. The median age at surgery was 10.3 years (IQR 6.4-12.5). Sixty five percent had a diagnosis of myelomeningocele, and 33 % had a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. A bladder augmentation was performed in 70 %, Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy in 52 %, Monti ileovesicostomy in 15 %, and antegrade continence enema channel in 38 %. The most commonly perceived barriers to implementation on the pre-pilot survey were "difficulty initiating and maintaining compliance with care pathway" in 51 % followed by a "lack of time, money, or clinical resources" in 36 %. The pre-pilot study experience, implementation, and pilot-phase outcomes are provided in the Table. All primary and secondary outcomes were achieved. DISCUSSION: The findings of the present study were similar to several small comparative studies with regard to the importance of a multidisciplinary team, strong leadership, and continuous audit for successful implementation of ERAS. Similar barriers were also encountered to other studies, which primarily related to a lack of administrative support, leadership, and buy-in from other services. The limitations of the present study included a relatively small heterogeneous cohort and absence of a comparative group, which will be addressed in the larger exploratory phase of the trial. The findings may also not be generaziable due to the need for sustainable processes that were unique to each center as well as an absence of adequate volume or resources at smaller centers. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS was successfully implemented for complex lower urinary tract reconstruction across 8 centers through a multidisciplinary team, structured approach based on the local context, and focus on a continuous audit.

Efficacy of oral sulfate tablets for bowel preparation and adenoma detection rate.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The adenoma detection rate (ADR), which is closely related to bowel preparation, is the most important factor for colonoscopy quality assessment. New oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) have been developed to improve bowel preparation compliance. This study evaluated the efficacy of OSTs in terms of the ADR and bowel preparation status. METHODS: Medical records of subjects under the age of 65 who underwent colonoscopy from March 2019 to February 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEG-A) was used as a bowel preparation for the first half of the study period, and OSTs were used for the second half. In total, 16 971 subjects were included in the study: 9199 (54.2%) used PEG-A, and 7772 (45.8%) used OSTs. Bowel cleansing quality was assessed by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). RESULTS: The average age was 50 years. The rate of adequate bowel preparation was higher in the OST group than in the PEG-A group (97.2% vs 95.0%, P < 0.001). The mean BBPS was also higher in the OST group (8.02 vs 7.75, P < 0.001). The adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), the ADR and the sessile serrated polyp detection rate (SSPDR) were higher in the OST group than in the PEG-A group (APC 0.56 ± 1.01 vs 0.48 ± 0.91, P < 0.001; ADR 34.5% vs 30.7%, P < 0.001; SSPDR 5.2% vs 3.3%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with PEG-A, OSTs yielded superior APC, ADRs, SSPDRs, and better bowel cleanliness. Therefore, OSTs are a good alternative for patients who have difficulty taking large-volume bowel preparation formulations.

Effectiveness of low-volume split-dose versus same-day morning polyethylene glycol regimen for adequacy of bowel preparation in patients undergoing colonoscopy: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Successful completion of colonoscopy depends largely on the quality of bowel preparation. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a commonly used preparation for colonoscopy. The timing of bowel preparation has evolved from previous day evening to the currently recommended split-dose regimen. It was observed that consumption of entire or a portion of PEG on the previous day can interfere with work and sleep. Hence, we designed this single-blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of the same-day PEG as compared with lowvolume split-dose PEG in patients undergoing late morning colonoscopy. METHODS: A total of 384 patients were randomized to same-day (SD group; n = 192) and split-dose (SPL group; n = 192) bowel preparation. The patients in both the groups received bisacodyl 10 mg at bedtime on the day prior to colonoscopy. The patients in the SD group took 2 L of PEG between 5:00 AM and 7:00 AM on the day of colonoscopy. The SPL group took 1 L of PEG between 6:00 PM and 7:00 PM on the preceding day and another liter between 6:00 AM and 7:00 AM on the day of colonoscopy. The adequacy of bowel preparation was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Tolerability was scored by recording symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, bloating, and abdominal pain. Acceptability was based on the overall satisfaction, willingness to repeat the same preparation, and interference with sleep on the preceding night. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range, [IQR]) BBPS in the SD group was 8 (6-9) while that in the SPL group was 6 (5-8) and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Similarly, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the SD group (86%) achieved adequate bowel preparation (BBPS score ≥ 6) when compared to those in the SPL group (73.4%) (p = 0.002). Tolerability as assessed by nausea, vomiting, bloating, and abdominal pain was similar in both the groups. There was also no significant difference with respect to overall satisfaction of taking bowel preparation (p = 0.33) or willingness to repeat the same regimen (p = 0.37) between the two groups. Patients in the SPL group had more interference with sleep on the preceding night (54% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Same-day morning PEG regimen can be considered an effective, well-tolerated, and acceptable bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Impact of opioid use on patients undergoing screening colonoscopy according to the quality of bowel preparation.

AIMS: Constipation associated with opioid therapy for chronic pain may negatively impact colonoscopy success. This retrospective, observational study using administrative data and electronic medical records evaluated the impact of opioid use on colonoscopy outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Procedural codes were used to identify patients who had a screening colonoscopy at two Henry Ford Health System centers (January 2015-December 2016). All patients had completed a standard uniform bowel preparation protocol. Medication orders and filled prescriptions were used to identify patients with a history of opioid use during the 28 days preprocedure (exposed) and a matched random sample of presumptive opioid nonusers (unexposed). Electronic medical records were reviewed for colonoscopy procedure data and outcomes.The exposed and unexposed groups included 964 and 1054 patients, respectively. Inadequate bowel preparation was significantly more common in the exposed versus unexposed group (18.5% vs 12.7%; P < 0.001). In the exposed and unexposed groups, 97.1 and 98.0% of colonoscopy procedures were completed, respectively (P = nonsignificant). Total procedure time was slightly increased for the exposed versus unexposed group (23.8 vs 22.5 min; P = 0.039). Polyp identification and cancer diagnosis were similar between groups. Prolonged sedation occurred in three patients in the exposed group and none in the unexposed group. Procedural complications were rare, but the incidence was significantly greater in the exposed versus unexposed group (1.3% vs 0.2%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid exposure was associated with significant reductions in the quality of preprocedure bowel preparation and an increased risk of complications in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

[Evidence-based perioperative medicine]. / Evidenzbasierte perioperative Medizin.

Perioperative medical interventions are an integral part of modern surgical management. In addition to the main manual aspects of surgical interventions, surgeons must also be familiar with preoperative and postoperative medical interventions. This ranges from the indications for perioperative anticoagulation, handling of drainage, adjusting the perioperative analgesia, prescribing an antibiotic prophylaxis to deciding whether a preoperative bowel preparation is necessary. Therefore, this article exemplifies some areas in perioperative medicine. Based on the best available evidence, it should always be critically assessed whether these perioperative interventions really contribute to the success of the treatment.

Favorable outcomes of prepackaged low-residue diet on bowel preparation for colonoscopy: Endoscopist-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: 2 L polyethylene glycol plus an ascorbic acid (PEGA) is known to be as effective. However, 2 L polyethylene glycol-based regimens are often still difficult for patients to tolerate. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate the potential of 1 L PEGA with prepackaged low-residue diet (PLD) as an alternative to 2 L PEGA before colonoscopy. METHODS: The subjects were randomly assigned to either of the two groups. The 2 L PEGA group received 2 L PEGA split regimen. The 1 L PEGA with PLD group received PLD on the day preceding colonoscopy and 1 L PEGA. All endoscopic procedures were performed by one physician who did not know patients allocation. Bowel preparation status were graded using Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS). A questionnaire regarding tolerability and safety was administered. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03329339). RESULTS: A total of 173 patients completed the study (86 in the 2 L PEGA group and 87 in the 1 L PEGA with PLD group). Bowel preparation was adequate in 88.4% (76/86) of patients in the 2 L PEGA group and 93.1% of patients in the 1 L PEGA with PLD group (81/87, P = 0.28). The patients in the 1 L PEGA with PLD group had higher whole Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score (P = 0.02) and expressed more satisfaction and willingness to repeat the procedure (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference with respect to compliance or safety. CONCLUSION: 1 L PEGA with PLD showed equivalent efficacy, greater satisfaction, and more willingness to repeat compared with 2 L PEGA for bowel preparation.

Enhanced recovery after surgery in children: Promising, evidence-based multidisciplinary care.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach to the care of the surgical patient focused on reducing the stress response and associated physiologic changes that accompany surgery. Over the past 20 years, ERAS programs have been found to result in reduced LOS and complications in adult patients. Despite abundant adult literature describing implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery programs, pediatric data in this area is sparse. This educational review describes the history and elements of ERAS protocols, reviews the available evidence in adult and pediatric populations, compares and contrasts ERAS with the PSH, and offers strategies for implementation and ideas for future directions of ERAS in children.

Evaluación comparativa de efectividad y tolerabilidad con polietilenglicol y picosulfato de sodio-citrato de magnesio como agentes de preparación intestinal para colonoscopia / Comparative evaluation of effectiveness and tolerability with polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulfate-magnesium citrate as intestinal preparation agents for colonoscopy

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.

Split-dose Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: 2 Liters Polyethylene Glycol with Ascorbic Acid versus Sodium Picosulfate versus Oral Sodium Phosphate Tablets.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Adequate bowel preparation is an essential factor affecting the visibility of colonic mucosa and safety of related therapeutic interventions. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of three bowel preparation agents -2 L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEGA), sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SPMC), and oral sodium phosphate tablet (NaP)- for morning colonoscopy. METHODS: Here, we analyzed the medical records of patients who had taken bowel preparation agents using the split-dose method and undergone colonoscopy in a single hospital. The efficacy of bowel preparation agents was evaluated using the Ottawa bowel preparation assessment tool. The safety and tolerability of the agents were assessed by measuring the renal function and electrolytes prior to and after the procedure as well as by assessing the self-reported questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 365 patients (PEGA:163, SPMC: 93, NaP: 109), 98.6% ingested more than 90% of the agents. NaP showed an inferior cleansing efficacy, and serum phosphate elevation was significantly higher in the NaP group. However, the satisfaction score was lowest in the PEGA group. Age (odds ratio [OR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.99, p=0.04) and preparation agents (OR of PEGA versus NaP 5.0, 95% CI 2.28-10.97, p<0.001) (OR of SPMC versus NaP 2.73, 95% CI 1.22-6.08, p=0.01) were independently associated with bowel preparation success. CONCLUSIONS: According to our analysis, NaP showed an inferior cleansing efficacy compared with PEGA and SPMC, which may be attributed to the complex administration method and lower water intake. However, large-volume ingestion remains unsatisfactory for patients. Detailed bowel preparation instructions could enhance bowel cleansing efficacy.

Limpieza intestinal para colonoscopia en niños: efectividad, adherencia y efectos adversos de esquemas diferenciados por edad / Intestinal cleaning for colonoscopy in children: effectiveness, adherence and adverse effects of schemes differentiated by age

La adecuada limpieza intestinal (LI) es fundamental para lograr el máximo rendimiento diagnóstico durante una colonoscopia. Existen diversos esquemas de LI, y en pediatría aún no hay consenso respecto al más adecuado. OBJETIVO: Describir la efectividad, adherencia y efectos adversos de protocolos de LI diferenciados por edad en pacientes pediátricos sometidos a colonoscopia. PACIENTES Y MÉTODO: Estudio descriptivo que incluyó pacientes < 18 años sometidos a colonoscopia. Se aplicaron esquemas de LI diferenciados por edad: < 6 meses (supositorio de glicerina); 6 meses-3 años, 11 meses (polietilenglicol [PEG] 3.350 sin electrolitos); 4 años-9 años, 11 meses (PEG 3.350 sin electrolitos + bisacodilo); 10 años-18 años (PEG 3.350 con electrolitos). Se registraron datos demográficos, clínicos, adherencia y efectos adversos. La efectividad fue determinada durante colonoscopia de acuerdo con la escala previamente validada (Boston modificada). RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 159 pacientes, de los cuales 87 fueron varones (55%), mediana de edad de 4 años (rango un mes-17 años). Se logró LI exitosa en el 78% de los pacientes. La mayor efectividad se alcanzó en < 6 meses (96%) y 10-18 años (91%). El grupo de 4 años-9 años, 11 meses, que evidenció menor efectividad (69%) tuvo mayor proporción de estreñimiento previo (29%). Se obtuvo buena adherencia en el 87% de los pacientes. Se observaron efectos adversos en un tercio de los pacientes (especialmente en el grupo 10-18 años), que fueron leves y no determinaron la suspensión del medicamento. CONCLUSIONES: Con los esquemas de preparación utilizados se lograron resultados satisfactorios, obteniendo LI exitosa en 4 de cada 5 pacientes. Los resultados difirieron entre grupos, lo que podría deberse, al menos en parte, al protocolo utilizado y al hábito intestinal previo.

Adequate intestinal cleanliness is crucial to achieve optimal colonoscopy performance. Several bowel preparation (BP) schemes have been proposed, but there is still no consensus as regards which is the most suitable in paediatric patients. OBJECTIVE: To describe the effectiveness, adherence, and adverse effects of BP protocols differentiated by age group in paediatric patients subjected to colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Prospective, study that included patients < 18 years subjected to colonoscopy. BP protocols differentiated by age group were indicated as follows: < 6 m (glycerine suppository); 6 m-3y 11 m (poly-ethylene-glycol (PEG 3350 without electrolytes); 4y-9y 11 m (PEG 3350 without electrolytes + bisacodyl); 10 y-18 y (PEG 3350 with electrolytes). Demographic, clinical information, adherence and adverse effects were registered. Effectiveness was determined using a validated scale (Boston modified) during colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients were included, of which 87 (55%) were males, and with a median age of 4 years (range 1 m-17 years). Seventy eight percent of patients achieved successful BP. The higher effectiveness was observed in the groups of < 6 m (96%) and 10-18 y (91%). Constipation was significantly more frequent (29%) in the 4 yo-9 yo 11 m in which lower effectiveness was observed (69%). Good adherence was observed in 87% of patients. Adverse effects were observed in a third of patients, although they were mild and did not lead to the suspension of the BP. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfactory results were achieved with the BP schemes used, with a successful BP being obtained in 4 out of 5 patients. Results were different between groups, which is probably related to previous bowel transit and indicated medication.

Split-dose Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: 2 Liters Polyethylene Glycol with Ascorbic Acid versus Sodium Picosulfate versus Oral Sodium Phosphate Tablets / 대한소화기학회지

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Adequate bowel preparation is an essential factor affecting the visibility of colonic mucosa and safety of related therapeutic interventions. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of three bowel preparation agents –2 L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEGA), sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SPMC), and oral sodium phosphate tablet (NaP)– for morning colonoscopy. METHODS: Here, we analyzed the medical records of patients who had taken bowel preparation agents using the split-dose method and undergone colonoscopy in a single hospital. The efficacy of bowel preparation agents was evaluated using the Ottawa bowel preparation assessment tool. The safety and tolerability of the agents were assessed by measuring the renal function and electrolytes prior to and after the procedure as well as by assessing the self-reported questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 365 patients (PEGA:163, SPMC: 93, NaP: 109), 98.6% ingested more than 90% of the agents. NaP showed an inferior cleansing efficacy, and serum phosphate elevation was significantly higher in the NaP group. However, the satisfaction score was lowest in the PEGA group. Age (odds ratio [OR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92–0.99, p=0.04) and preparation agents (OR of PEGA versus NaP 5.0, 95% CI 2.28–10.97, p<0.001) (OR of SPMC versus NaP 2.73, 95% CI 1.22–6.08, p=0.01) were independently associated with bowel preparation success. CONCLUSIONS: According to our analysis, NaP showed an inferior cleansing efficacy compared with PEGA and SPMC, which may be attributed to the complex administration method and lower water intake. However, large-volume ingestion remains unsatisfactory for patients. Detailed bowel preparation instructions could enhance bowel cleansing efficacy.

[Comparative Study on Bowel Preparation Efficacy of Ascorbic Acid Containing Polyethylene Glycol by Adding Either Simethicone or 1 L of Water in Health Medical Examination Patients: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: There are no studies that looked into the bubble eliminating efficacy of polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEGA), which has been one of the shortcomings of polyethylene glycol (PEG). In this study, we compared newly introduced PEGA regimen by adding either simethicone or 1 L of water. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled study was carried out at Dongguk Universtiy Gyeongju Hospital from July 2014 to September 2014. A total of 90 patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups; PEGA group (n=30) which served as control, simethicone addition group (n=30) to which simethicone 400 mg was additionally prescribed, and water addition group (n=30) to whom additional 1 L of water was given. Cleansing effectiveness, gas elimination efficacy, side effects, and patient satisfaction were compared between the groups. RESULTS: PEGA group demonstrated the highest cleansing effectiveness, but there was no statistically significant difference among the groups. Simethicone addition group showed significantly lesser amount of bubbles than the other groups (2.57±2.05 vs. 1.10±1.83 vs. 2.60±2.84, p=0.017). The rates of side effects in each group were 20.00% vs. 16.77% vs. 53.33%. Water addition group had significantly more side effects than the PEGA group and the simethicone addition group (p=0.003). The patient satisfaction score of each group was 3.37±0.85 vs. 3.73±0.74 vs. 3.20±0.66 with simethicone addition group showing significantly higher satisfaction than water addition group (p=0.020). CONCLUSIONS: PEGA bowel preparation agent showed satisfactory bowel cleansing despite the decrease in dosage, and addition of simethicone resulted in better bubble elimination.

Use of Bristol Stool Form Scale to predict the adequacy of bowel preparation - a prospective study.

AIM: Inadequate bowel preparation continues to be a substantial problem for colonoscopy. The seven-point Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) has been associated with delayed colonic transit in adults. We evaluated the utility of the BSFS to identify patients more likely to present with an inadequate preparation. METHOD: Two large community-based academic medical centres in New Jersey, USA, studied a prospective cohort of 411 consecutive patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy who were prescribed similar bowel preparations. The BSFS and several other study variables were collected by gastroenterology fellows during an outpatient visit prior to scheduling colonoscopy. All colonoscopy examinations were performed in the morning by a gastroenterologist who graded the adequacy of bowel preparation. Inadequate preparation was defined as one resulting in a repeat colonoscopy at a shorter time interval than would generally be recommended based solely on risk factors or pathological findings. The ability of study variables to discriminate those who did or did not have an adequate preparation was summarized by the c-statistic. The relationship between variables that provided some discrimination and the probability of an adequate preparation was modelled using logistic regression. RESULTS: The mean age of the study sample was 56 ± 8 (SD) years and 63% were women. Bowel preparation was adequate in 337 (82%) of the patients. The BSFS ratings ranged from 1 to 7. The score was <3 in 144 (35%) indicating lower gastrointestinal motility. There was a statistically significant association between the score and the probability of an adequate bowel preparation (odds ratio 1.4; 95% confidence interval 1.2-1.7; P < 0.001) and the c-statistic was 0.64 (0.58-0.70). CONCLUSION: Use of the BSFS may help identify patients for whom standard bowel preparation most probably will not be adequate.

Comparative Study on Bowel Preparation Efficacy of Ascorbic Acid Containing Polyethylene Glycol by Adding Either Simethicone or 1 L of Water in Health Medical Examination Patients: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study / 대한소화기학회지

BACKGROUND/AIMS: There are no studies that looked into the bubble eliminating efficacy of polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEGA), which has been one of the shortcomings of polyethylene glycol (PEG). In this study, we compared newly introduced PEGA regimen by adding either simethicone or 1 L of water. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled study was carried out at Dongguk Universtiy Gyeongju Hospital from July 2014 to September 2014. A total of 90 patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups; PEGA group (n=30) which served as control, simethicone addition group (n=30) to which simethicone 400 mg was additionally prescribed, and water addition group (n=30) to whom additional 1 L of water was given. Cleansing effectiveness, gas elimination efficacy, side effects, and patient satisfaction were compared between the groups. RESULTS: PEGA group demonstrated the highest cleansing effectiveness, but there was no statistically significant difference among the groups. Simethicone addition group showed significantly lesser amount of bubbles than the other groups (2.57±2.05 vs. 1.10±1.83 vs. 2.60±2.84, p=0.017). The rates of side effects in each group were 20.00% vs. 16.77% vs. 53.33%. Water addition group had significantly more side effects than the PEGA group and the simethicone addition group (p=0.003). The patient satisfaction score of each group was 3.37±0.85 vs. 3.73±0.74 vs. 3.20±0.66 with simethicone addition group showing significantly higher satisfaction than water addition group (p=0.020). CONCLUSIONS: PEGA bowel preparation agent showed satisfactory bowel cleansing despite the decrease in dosage, and addition of simethicone resulted in better bubble elimination.

[Effects of a Patient Educational Video Program on Bowel Preparation Prior to Colonoscopy].

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of an educational video program on bowel preparation for a colonoscopy. METHODS: The study used a non-equivalent control group and non-synchronized design as a quasi-experimental research involving 101 participants undergoing bowel preparation for a colonoscopy (experimental group 51, control group 50 subjects) at W. university hospital, from Aug. 7 to Oct. 31, 2013. The control group received verbal education with an explanatory note while the experimental group received education using a video program. To measure knowledge of diet restrictions and compliance with ingesting bowel preparation solutions, a questionnaire, based on The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's Guide (2003), developed by Sam-Sook You, was used after revisions and supplementation was done. To measure bowel cleanness, the 'Aronchick Bowel Preparation Scale' was adopted. Data were analyzed using the SPSS WIN 12.0 program. RESULTS: A higher proportion of the experimental group showed a positive change in knowledge level on diet restrictions (U=1011.50, p=.035) and ingestion of bowel preparation solutions (U=980.50, p=.019), a higher level of compliance with diet restrictions (U=638.50, p<.001), ingesting bowel preparation solutions (U=668.00, p<.001) and the level of bowel cleanness (χ²=17.00, p<.001) than the control group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that a video educational program for patients having a colonoscopy can improve knowledge, level of compliance with diet restrictions, ingestion of bowel preparation solutions, and bowel cleanness. Therefore video educational program should be used with this patient group.

Polyethylene glycol plus an oral sulfate solution as a bowel cleansing regimen for colon capsule endoscopy: a prospective, single-arm study in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: As with colonoscopy, adequate bowel cleansing is essential prior to colon capsule endoscopy (CCE). Because CCE requires that the capsule traverse the entire gastrointestinal tract during the examination, laxative 'boosters' are used. The objective of this prospective, single-center, single-arm study was to evaluate the safety of a bowel preparation consisting of polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus an oral sulfate solution. METHODS: Subjects were healthy volunteers aged 50-75 years old with normal baseline serum chemistry. The bowel preparation consisted of 4 Senna tablets, 4 liters of PEG (split dose), 10 mg metoclopramide, 2 oral sulfate solution boosters (6 oz. and 3 oz.), and 10 mg bisacodyl. Serum chemistry was performed at baseline, following PEG intake, 24 hours after bisacodyl administration, and at 7 days post procedure (in subjects with abnormal 24 hour results). The primary endpoints were the percentage of subjects with a clinically significant change in serum chemistry at the last test and the adverse event (AE) rate. RESULTS: A total of 25 subjects were enrolled. The serum chemistry was normal in all subjects at the final evaluation. One subject showed a slight elevation in creatinine (1.08 mg/dl 7 days post procedure from 0.84 mg/dl at baseline), deemed not clinically significant. Another subject had a transient elevation in serum creatinine (from 1.01 mg/dl at baseline to 1.45 mg/dl at 24 hours after the bowel preparation); values returned to near baseline at 7 days post procedure (1.06 mg/dl). There were no serious AEs, three moderate AEs related to the bowel preparation (nausea, headache, elevated creatinine) and two mild unrelated AEs (chills, abdominal cramping). CONCLUSIONS: A bowel cleansing regimen of PEG plus an oral sulfate solution can be used in healthy volunteers. These data provide support for the continued study of this regimen in future CCE clinical trials and in medical practice.

The use of low-volume polyethylene glycol containing ascorbic acid versus 2 L of polyethylene glycol plus bisacodyl as bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations have been developed to improve compliance for colonoscopy. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid for colonoscopy against 2 L of PEG plus bisacodyl. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive inpatients who had not undergone polypectomy at the index colonoscopy and were subsequently referred for polypectomy at our hospital. A total of 62 patients were randomized to receive either low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid (n = 31) or 2 L of PEG plus bisacodyl (n = 31) as a split-dose regimen in inpatients. The efficacy of preparation was determined using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Score (OBPS) and a 4-point scale. Adverse events, tolerability, and willingness were evaluated using a questionnaire. RESULTS: Based on the OBPS and 4-point scale, we determined that the efficacy of low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid was comparable to that of the 2 L of PEG plus bisacodyl (p = 0.071 for OBPS, p = 0.056 for the 4-point scale). Adverse events were comparable between the two groups (p = 1.000). A greater proportion of patients in the low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid (90.6%) and the 2L of PEG plus bisacodyl (96.9%) were willing to repeat the same preparation for subsequent colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid had comparable efficacy and tolerability to 2 L of PEG plus bisacodyl, when given as a split dose, for colonoscopy in inpatients. Split-dose low-volume PEG containing ascorbic acid is a good alternative for bowel preparation for colonoscopy in inpatients.

Urticaria due to polyethylene glycol-3350 and electrolytes for oral solution in a patient with jejunal nodular lymphoid hyperplasia.

Both jejunal nodular lymphoid hyperplasia (NLH) and polyethylene glycol (PEG)-3350 hypersensitivity are extremely rare. We describe a 30-year-old female who had previously taken a PEG-3350 bowel preparation without adverse effects, and presented for evaluation of chronic diarrhea. An upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, and small bowel series were scheduled. PEG-3350 and electrolytes for oral solution was prescribed for bowel cleansing. During consumption of the bowel preparation she developed urticarial hypersensitivity. An alternative bowel preparation was used. Colonoscopy and upper endoscopy were normal, but small bowel series revealed innumerable sand-like lucencies in the jejunum. NLH was confirmed on biopsy from antegrade enteroscopy. This is the first case report on the pathological jejunal NLH in association with the PEG-3350 urticarial hypersensitivity. The potential pathophysiological etiology of this association is discussed.

Effects of a Patient Educational Video Program on Bowel Preparation Prior to Colonoscopy

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of an educational video program on bowel preparation for a colonoscopy. METHODS: The study used a non-equivalent control group and non-synchronized design as a quasi-experimental research involving 101 participants undergoing bowel preparation for a colonoscopy (experimental group 51, control group 50 subjects) at W. university hospital, from Aug. 7 to Oct. 31, 2013. The control group received verbal education with an explanatory note while the experimental group received education using a video program. To measure knowledge of diet restrictions and compliance with ingesting bowel preparation solutions, a questionnaire, based on The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's Guide (2003), developed by Sam-Sook You, was used after revisions and supplementation was done. To measure bowel cleanness, the 'Aronchick Bowel Preparation Scale' was adopted. Data were analyzed using the SPSS WIN 12.0 program. RESULTS: A higher proportion of the experimental group showed a positive change in knowledge level on diet restrictions (U=1011.50, p=.035) and ingestion of bowel preparation solutions (U=980.50, p=.019), a higher level of compliance with diet restrictions (U=638.50, p<.001), ingesting bowel preparation solutions (U=668.00, p<.001) and the level of bowel cleanness (chi2=17.00, p<.001) than the control group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that a video educational program for patients having a colonoscopy can improve knowledge, level of compliance with diet restrictions, ingestion of bowel preparation solutions, and bowel cleanness. Therefore video educational program should be used with this patient group.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Sodium Phosphate Tablets versus 2 L Polyethylene Glycol Solution for Bowel Cleansing prior to Colonoscopy / 대한소화기학회지

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Performance of polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) is often unsatisfactory as bowel preparation agent for colonoscopy. In order to provide equivalent efficacy with better patient tolerance, sodium phosphate tablet (SPT) has been developed. This study was carried out to compare the efficacy and compliance of two bowel preparation methods: PEG with ascorbic acid (PEGA) vs. SPT preparation. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial was performed. Primary efficacy variable was overall quality of colon cleansing assessed by Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) during colonoscopy. Patient's satisfaction and adverse events were evaluated by means of symptom questionnaire completed by each patient immediately before colonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients were randomly assigned to undergo pre-colonoscopic bowel preparation with either SPT (n=96) or PEGA (n=93). Overall BBPS score was 8.3+/-1.12 in the SPT group and 8.4+/-0.96 in the PEGA group (p=0.441). Among the 189 patients, 90 had polyps (47.6%) and 50 had adenomas (26.5%). The polyp/adenoma detection rate was 54.2% (n=52)/27.1% (n=26) for SPT group and 40.9% (n=38)/25.8% (n=24) for PEGA group (p=0.079 and 0.790, respectively). More number of patients were unable to take the prescribed dose of PEGA compared with the SPT regimen (8.6% vs. 2.0%, p=0.045). Overall satisfaction score was 7.9+/-1.63 in the SPT group and 7.4+/-1.53 in the PEGA group (p=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Degree of colon preparation, polyp/adenoma detection rate and adverse effect were similar between SPT group and PEGA group. Patient compliance and satisfaction were greater in the SPT group.