Effect of bowel preparation volume in inpatient colonoscopy. Results of a prospective, randomized, comparative pilot study
Authors:
- Patricia V. HernandezPHPatricia V. Hernandez
- Jennifer L. Horsley-SilvaJHJennifer L. Horsley-Silva
- Diana L. SnyderDSDiana L. Snyder
- Noemi BaffyNBNoemi Baffy
- Mary AtiaMAMary Atia
- Laura KoepkeLKLaura Koepke
- Matthew R. BurasMBMatthew R. Buras
- Elisabeth S. LimELElisabeth S. Lim
- Kevin RuffKRKevin Ruff
- Sarah B. UmarSUSarah B. Umar
- Sameer IslamSISameer Islam
- Francisco C. RamirezFRFrancisco C. Ramirez
Open Access
- 13 July 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Gastroenterology
- Vol. 20 (1) , 1-7
Abstract
Background: Inpatient status has been shown to be a predictor of poor bowel preparation for colonoscopy; however, the optimal bowel preparation regimen for hospitalized patients is unknown. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of bowel preparation volume size in hospitalized patients undergoing inpatient colonoscopy. Methods: This prospective, single blinded (endoscopist), randomized controlled trial was conducted as a pilot study at a tertiary referral medical center. Hospitalized patients undergoing inpatient colonoscopy were assigned randomly to receive a high, medium, or low-volume preparation. Data collection included colon preparation quality, based on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, and a questionnaire given to all subjects evaluating the ability to completely finish bowel preparation and adverse effects (unpleasant taste, nausea, and vomiting). Results: Twenty-five colonoscopies were performed in 25 subjects. Patients who received low-volume preparation averaged a higher mean total BBPS (7.4, SD 1.62), in comparison to patients who received high-volume (7.0, SD 1.41) and medium-volume prep (6.9, SD 1.55), P = 0.77. When evaluating taste a higher score meant worse taste. The low-volume group scored unpleasant taste as 0.6 (0.74), while the high-volume group gave unpleasant taste a score of 2.2 (0.97) and the medium-volume group gave a score of 2.1 (1.36), P < 0.01. Conclusion: In this pilot study we found that low-volume colon preparation may be preferred in the inpatient setting due its better rate of tolerability and comparable bowel cleanliness when compared to larger volume preparation, although we cannot overreach any definitive conclusion. Further more robust studies are required to confirm these findings. Trial registration: The Affect of Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Hospitalized Patients Colonoscopies. Trial registration: NCT01978509 (terminated). Retrospectively registered on November 07, 2013.Keywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Optimizing Adequacy of Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy: Recommendations From the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal CancerGastroenterology, 2014
- Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores provide a standardized definition of adequate for describing bowel cleanlinessGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2014
- A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Low-Volume Polyethylene Glycol plus Ascorbic Acid versus Standard-Volume Polyethylene Glycol Solution as Bowel Preparations for ColonoscopyPLOS ONE, 2014
- Patient compliance and suboptimal bowel preparation with split-dose bowel regimen in average-risk screening colonoscopyGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2014
- 4-Liter Split-Dose Polyethylene Glycol Is Superior to Other Bowel Preparations, Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysisClinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2012
- Colonoscopy preparationGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2009
- Duration of the interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy predicts bowel-preparation qualityGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2009
- The impact of poor bowel preparation on colonoscopy: a prospective single centre study of 10 571 colonoscopiesColorectal Disease, 2007
- Preparation for Colonoscopy in Hospitalized PatientsDigestive Diseases and Sciences, 2007
- A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a Task Force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES)Surgical Endoscopy, 2006