Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 1/2015

01-01-2015 | Original Article

Transenteral Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy Is More Comfortable than the Traditional Method with No Inferiority in Efficacy

Authors: Sung-Won Jung, Da Hye Jung, Young Chul Shin, In Ho Moh, Hana Yoo, Sung Il Jang, Su Rin Shin, Jin Bae Kim, Sang Hoon Park, Myung Seok Lee

Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Transenteral (TE) administration of a bowel cleanser prior to colonoscopy avoids the discomfort associated with drinking a large volume of unpalatable cleanser.

Aim

To explore patient comfort, preference for future colonoscopy, the efficacy and adverse events associated with TE bowel preparation.

Methods

Bowel preparation is traditionally practised using polyethylene glycol (PEG) + ascorbic acid (ASC), which was the treatment used in the control group (peroral group; PO group). In the study group (TE group), PEG + ASC were administered directly to the third portion of the duodenum through a scope immediately after completing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Results

A higher proportion of subjects in the TE group graded their degree of comfort as very or rather comfortable (28.4 % in the PO group, 65.1 % in the TE group; p = 0.000) and had greater preference for future colonoscopy (69.6 % in the PO group, 82.5 % in the TE group; p = 0.030), compared with the PO group. The TE group had non-inferiority in efficacy compared with the PO group (non-inferiority margin −15 %; lower limit of 95 % confidence interval for difference between success rates −6.4 %, when using the Aronchick Scale, and −7.1 % when using the Ottawa Scale). Nausea or vomiting were more prevalent during preparation in the PO group (46.1 vs. 17.5 %; p = 0.000), and dizziness was more common in the TE group (0 vs. 12.6 %; p = 0.000).

Conclusions

TE preparation was found to be more comfortable than the traditional peroral method and not inferior in efficacy. The adverse events rate was acceptable.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jung KW, Won YJ, Kong HJ, Oh CM, Lee DH, Lee JS. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2011. Cancer Res Treat. 2014;46:109–123.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Jung KW, Won YJ, Kong HJ, Oh CM, Lee DH, Lee JS. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2011. Cancer Res Treat. 2014;46:109–123.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Park B, Lee HY, Choi KS, Lee YY, Jun JK, Park EC. Cancer screening in Korea, 2010: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12:2123–2128.PubMed Park B, Lee HY, Choi KS, Lee YY, Jun JK, Park EC. Cancer screening in Korea, 2010: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12:2123–2128.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Ell C, Fischbach W, Bronisch HJ, et al. Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:883–893.PubMedCrossRef Ell C, Fischbach W, Bronisch HJ, et al. Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:883–893.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hookey LC, Vanner SJ. Pico-salax plus two-day bisacodyl is superior to pico-salax alone or oral sodium phosphate for colon cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:703–709.PubMedCrossRef Hookey LC, Vanner SJ. Pico-salax plus two-day bisacodyl is superior to pico-salax alone or oral sodium phosphate for colon cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:703–709.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ko CW, Riffle S, Shapiro JA, et al. Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:648–656.PubMedCrossRef Ko CW, Riffle S, Shapiro JA, et al. Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65:648–656.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH, DuFrayne FJ, Bergman GE. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing [abstract]. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:2667. Aronchick CA, Lipshutz WH, Wright SH, DuFrayne FJ, Bergman GE. Validation of an instrument to assess colon cleansing [abstract]. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:2667.
7.
go back to reference Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:482–486.PubMedCrossRef Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:482–486.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:378–384.PubMedCrossRef Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:378–384.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bernstein C, Thorn M, Monsees K, Spell R, O’Connor JB. A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:72–75.PubMedCrossRef Bernstein C, Thorn M, Monsees K, Spell R, O’Connor JB. A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:72–75.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Valiante F, Pontone S, Hassan C, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating a new 2-L PEG solution plus ascorbic acid vs 4-L PEG for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis. 2012;44:224–227.PubMedCrossRef Valiante F, Pontone S, Hassan C, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating a new 2-L PEG solution plus ascorbic acid vs 4-L PEG for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis. 2012;44:224–227.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Worthington J, Thyssen M, Chapman G, Chapman R, Geraint M. A randomised controlled trial of a new 2 litre polyethylene glycol solution versus sodium picosulphate + magnesium citrate solution for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24:481–488.PubMedCrossRef Worthington J, Thyssen M, Chapman G, Chapman R, Geraint M. A randomised controlled trial of a new 2 litre polyethylene glycol solution versus sodium picosulphate + magnesium citrate solution for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24:481–488.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hoy SM, Scott LJ, Wagstaff AJ. Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate: a review of its use as a colorectal cleanser. Drugs. 2009;69:123–136.PubMedCrossRef Hoy SM, Scott LJ, Wagstaff AJ. Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate: a review of its use as a colorectal cleanser. Drugs. 2009;69:123–136.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Katz PO, Rex DK, Epstein M, et al. A dual-action, low-volume bowel cleanser administered the day before colonoscopy: results from the SEE CLEAR II study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:401–409.PubMedCrossRef Katz PO, Rex DK, Epstein M, et al. A dual-action, low-volume bowel cleanser administered the day before colonoscopy: results from the SEE CLEAR II study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:401–409.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Chorev N, Chadad B, Segal N, et al. Preparation for colonoscopy in hospitalized patients. Dig Dis Sci. 2007;52:835–839.PubMedCrossRef Chorev N, Chadad B, Segal N, et al. Preparation for colonoscopy in hospitalized patients. Dig Dis Sci. 2007;52:835–839.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ness RM, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:1797–1802.PubMedCrossRef Ness RM, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:1797–1802.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Maeng JH, Ko BM, Lee MS, et al. Effectiveness and tolerance of duodenoscopic bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Korean J Gastroenterol. 2007;50:78–83.PubMed Maeng JH, Ko BM, Lee MS, et al. Effectiveness and tolerance of duodenoscopic bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Korean J Gastroenterol. 2007;50:78–83.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Seo EH, Kim TO, Park MJ, et al. Optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy interval in split-dose PEG bowel preparation determines satisfactory bowel preparation quality: an observational prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:583–590.PubMedCrossRef Seo EH, Kim TO, Park MJ, et al. Optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy interval in split-dose PEG bowel preparation determines satisfactory bowel preparation quality: an observational prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:583–590.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Eun CS, Han DS, Hyun YS, et al. The timing of bowel preparation is more important than the timing of colonoscopy in determining the quality of bowel cleansing. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:539–544.PubMedCrossRef Eun CS, Han DS, Hyun YS, et al. The timing of bowel preparation is more important than the timing of colonoscopy in determining the quality of bowel cleansing. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:539–544.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Post RE, Dickerson LM. Dizziness: a diagnostic approach. Am Fam Physician. 2010;82:361–368.PubMed Post RE, Dickerson LM. Dizziness: a diagnostic approach. Am Fam Physician. 2010;82:361–368.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Transenteral Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy Is More Comfortable than the Traditional Method with No Inferiority in Efficacy
Authors
Sung-Won Jung
Da Hye Jung
Young Chul Shin
In Ho Moh
Hana Yoo
Sung Il Jang
Su Rin Shin
Jin Bae Kim
Sang Hoon Park
Myung Seok Lee
Publication date
01-01-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-014-3344-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 1/2015 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine