A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates
Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations are better tolerated by patients than high-volume preparations and may achieve similar preparation quality. However, there is little data comparing their effects on a recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy (because of a suboptimal prepa...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2017-04, Vol.12 (4), p.e0176265-e0176265 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0176265 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | e0176265 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 12 |
| creator | Hankins, Sam C Brimhall, Bryan B Kankanala, Vineel Austin, Gregory L |
| description | Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations are better tolerated by patients than high-volume preparations and may achieve similar preparation quality. However, there is little data comparing their effects on a recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy (because of a suboptimal preparation), procedure times, adenoma detection rate (ADR), and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR).
This is a retrospective cohort study of outpatient colonoscopies performed during a one-year period at a single academic medical center in which low-volume MoviPrep® (n = 1841) or high-volume Colyte® (n = 1337) was used. All preparations were split-dosed. Appropriate covariates were included in regression models assessing suboptimal preparation quality (fair, poor, or inadequate), procedure times, recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy, ADR, and AADR.
MoviPrep® was associated with an increase in having a suboptimal bowel preparation (OR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.06-1.76), but it was not associated with differences in insertion (p = 0.43), withdrawal (p = 0.22), or total procedure times (p = 0.10). The adjusted percentage with a suboptimal preparation was 11.7% for patients using MoviPrep® and 8.8% for patients using Colyte®. MoviPrep® was not associated with a significant difference in overall ADR (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78-1.11), AADR (OR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.87-1.62), or recommendation for early repeat colonoscopy (OR 1.16; 95% CI: 0.72-1.88).
MoviPrep® was associated with a small absolute increase in having a suboptimal preparation, but did not affect recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, or adenoma detection rates. Mechanisms to reduce financial barriers limiting low-volume preparations should be considered because of their favorable tolerability profile. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0176265 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1990008579</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_0a321a1cd68b49d9a85fcf88066fe126</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>1893552369</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a084da7cb35017bf0516db3450074f61ccff085d5b40fd0d8fa5fc956e9a40f63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUktv1DAQjhCIlsI_QGCJC4fu4jzsOBekquJRqRIXOFsTe7KbyvEEO-lq_yq_Bu-jqxZxGmvme8yMJ8ve5nyZl3X-6Y7m4MEtR_K45HktCymeZed5UxYLWfDy-aP3WfYqxjvORamkfJmdFaqqlGjUefbnijnaLO7JzQOykdwWp_XWoUe2cltDjsVUmnrybAORQYxkepjQsk0_rRl41nsTEGLKxLmlceoHcKylDTo2BhwhwJ6dArJ2ntgaErIfegeBBTQ0DOjtHhNZR2EniRDcNhVHhImlHshTNDRuL5MiGbRzQJZ8MF4mtGVg0dMAzOKE5mQWX2cvOnAR3xzjRfbr65ef198Xtz--3Vxf3S6MKOS0AK4qC7VpS5G22HZc5NK2ZSU4r6tO5sZ0HVfCirbineVWdSA60wiJDaSMLC-y9wfd0VHUx2-JOm8azhOxbhLi5oCwBHd6DGlFYasJer1PUFhpCFNvHGoOZZFDbqxUbdXYBlQy65TiUnaYFzu3z0e3uR3QGvRTAPdE9GnF92u9onstKl7XqkoCH48CgX7PGCc99NGgc-CR5tS3akohilLu-v7wD_T_01UHlAkUY8Du1EzO9e5UH1h6d6r6eKqJ9u7xICfSw22WfwFWee8h</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1990008579</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Hankins, Sam C ; Brimhall, Bryan B ; Kankanala, Vineel ; Austin, Gregory L</creator><contributor>Green, John</contributor><creatorcontrib>Hankins, Sam C ; Brimhall, Bryan B ; Kankanala, Vineel ; Austin, Gregory L ; Green, John</creatorcontrib><description>Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations are better tolerated by patients than high-volume preparations and may achieve similar preparation quality. However, there is little data comparing their effects on a recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy (because of a suboptimal preparation), procedure times, adenoma detection rate (ADR), and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR).
This is a retrospective cohort study of outpatient colonoscopies performed during a one-year period at a single academic medical center in which low-volume MoviPrep® (n = 1841) or high-volume Colyte® (n = 1337) was used. All preparations were split-dosed. Appropriate covariates were included in regression models assessing suboptimal preparation quality (fair, poor, or inadequate), procedure times, recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy, ADR, and AADR.
MoviPrep® was associated with an increase in having a suboptimal bowel preparation (OR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.06-1.76), but it was not associated with differences in insertion (p = 0.43), withdrawal (p = 0.22), or total procedure times (p = 0.10). The adjusted percentage with a suboptimal preparation was 11.7% for patients using MoviPrep® and 8.8% for patients using Colyte®. MoviPrep® was not associated with a significant difference in overall ADR (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78-1.11), AADR (OR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.87-1.62), or recommendation for early repeat colonoscopy (OR 1.16; 95% CI: 0.72-1.88).
MoviPrep® was associated with a small absolute increase in having a suboptimal preparation, but did not affect recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, or adenoma detection rates. Mechanisms to reduce financial barriers limiting low-volume preparations should be considered because of their favorable tolerability profile.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176265</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28448598</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adenoma ; Adenoma - diagnosis ; Adenoma - surgery ; Cohort Studies ; Colon ; Colonoscopy ; Colonoscopy - methods ; Colorectal cancer ; Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Electrolytes ; Engineering and Technology ; Female ; Gastroenterology ; Health care facilities ; Hepatology ; Humans ; Intestine ; Intestines - surgery ; Male ; Medicaid ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical screening ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Middle Aged ; Patients ; Polyethylene ; Polyethylene glycol ; Polyethylene Glycols - chemistry ; Quality ; Quality assessment ; Regression analysis ; Regression models ; Retrospective Studies ; Solutions ; Time Factors ; Transplants & implants ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2017-04, Vol.12 (4), p.e0176265-e0176265</ispartof><rights>2017 Hankins et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2017 Hankins et al 2017 Hankins et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a084da7cb35017bf0516db3450074f61ccff085d5b40fd0d8fa5fc956e9a40f63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a084da7cb35017bf0516db3450074f61ccff085d5b40fd0d8fa5fc956e9a40f63</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9994-0323</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5407784/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5407784/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28448598$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Green, John</contributor><creatorcontrib>Hankins, Sam C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brimhall, Bryan B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kankanala, Vineel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Austin, Gregory L</creatorcontrib><title>A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations are better tolerated by patients than high-volume preparations and may achieve similar preparation quality. However, there is little data comparing their effects on a recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy (because of a suboptimal preparation), procedure times, adenoma detection rate (ADR), and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR).
This is a retrospective cohort study of outpatient colonoscopies performed during a one-year period at a single academic medical center in which low-volume MoviPrep® (n = 1841) or high-volume Colyte® (n = 1337) was used. All preparations were split-dosed. Appropriate covariates were included in regression models assessing suboptimal preparation quality (fair, poor, or inadequate), procedure times, recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy, ADR, and AADR.
MoviPrep® was associated with an increase in having a suboptimal bowel preparation (OR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.06-1.76), but it was not associated with differences in insertion (p = 0.43), withdrawal (p = 0.22), or total procedure times (p = 0.10). The adjusted percentage with a suboptimal preparation was 11.7% for patients using MoviPrep® and 8.8% for patients using Colyte®. MoviPrep® was not associated with a significant difference in overall ADR (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78-1.11), AADR (OR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.87-1.62), or recommendation for early repeat colonoscopy (OR 1.16; 95% CI: 0.72-1.88).
MoviPrep® was associated with a small absolute increase in having a suboptimal preparation, but did not affect recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, or adenoma detection rates. Mechanisms to reduce financial barriers limiting low-volume preparations should be considered because of their favorable tolerability profile.</description><subject>Adenoma</subject><subject>Adenoma - diagnosis</subject><subject>Adenoma - surgery</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Colon</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Colorectal cancer</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Electrolytes</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Health care facilities</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intestine</subject><subject>Intestines - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicaid</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Polyethylene</subject><subject>Polyethylene glycol</subject><subject>Polyethylene Glycols - chemistry</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Regression models</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Solutions</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptUktv1DAQjhCIlsI_QGCJC4fu4jzsOBekquJRqRIXOFsTe7KbyvEEO-lq_yq_Bu-jqxZxGmvme8yMJ8ve5nyZl3X-6Y7m4MEtR_K45HktCymeZed5UxYLWfDy-aP3WfYqxjvORamkfJmdFaqqlGjUefbnijnaLO7JzQOykdwWp_XWoUe2cltDjsVUmnrybAORQYxkepjQsk0_rRl41nsTEGLKxLmlceoHcKylDTo2BhwhwJ6dArJ2ntgaErIfegeBBTQ0DOjtHhNZR2EniRDcNhVHhImlHshTNDRuL5MiGbRzQJZ8MF4mtGVg0dMAzOKE5mQWX2cvOnAR3xzjRfbr65ef198Xtz--3Vxf3S6MKOS0AK4qC7VpS5G22HZc5NK2ZSU4r6tO5sZ0HVfCirbineVWdSA60wiJDaSMLC-y9wfd0VHUx2-JOm8azhOxbhLi5oCwBHd6DGlFYasJer1PUFhpCFNvHGoOZZFDbqxUbdXYBlQy65TiUnaYFzu3z0e3uR3QGvRTAPdE9GnF92u9onstKl7XqkoCH48CgX7PGCc99NGgc-CR5tS3akohilLu-v7wD_T_01UHlAkUY8Du1EzO9e5UH1h6d6r6eKqJ9u7xICfSw22WfwFWee8h</recordid><startdate>20170427</startdate><enddate>20170427</enddate><creator>Hankins, Sam C</creator><creator>Brimhall, Bryan B</creator><creator>Kankanala, Vineel</creator><creator>Austin, Gregory L</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9994-0323</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170427</creationdate><title>A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates</title><author>Hankins, Sam C ; Brimhall, Bryan B ; Kankanala, Vineel ; Austin, Gregory L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a084da7cb35017bf0516db3450074f61ccff085d5b40fd0d8fa5fc956e9a40f63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adenoma</topic><topic>Adenoma - diagnosis</topic><topic>Adenoma - surgery</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Colon</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Colorectal cancer</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Electrolytes</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Health care facilities</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intestine</topic><topic>Intestines - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicaid</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Polyethylene</topic><topic>Polyethylene glycol</topic><topic>Polyethylene Glycols - chemistry</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Regression models</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Solutions</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hankins, Sam C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brimhall, Bryan B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kankanala, Vineel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Austin, Gregory L</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hankins, Sam C</au><au>Brimhall, Bryan B</au><au>Kankanala, Vineel</au><au>Austin, Gregory L</au><au>Green, John</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2017-04-27</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e0176265</spage><epage>e0176265</epage><pages>e0176265-e0176265</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparations are better tolerated by patients than high-volume preparations and may achieve similar preparation quality. However, there is little data comparing their effects on a recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy (because of a suboptimal preparation), procedure times, adenoma detection rate (ADR), and advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR).
This is a retrospective cohort study of outpatient colonoscopies performed during a one-year period at a single academic medical center in which low-volume MoviPrep® (n = 1841) or high-volume Colyte® (n = 1337) was used. All preparations were split-dosed. Appropriate covariates were included in regression models assessing suboptimal preparation quality (fair, poor, or inadequate), procedure times, recommendation for an early repeat colonoscopy, ADR, and AADR.
MoviPrep® was associated with an increase in having a suboptimal bowel preparation (OR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.06-1.76), but it was not associated with differences in insertion (p = 0.43), withdrawal (p = 0.22), or total procedure times (p = 0.10). The adjusted percentage with a suboptimal preparation was 11.7% for patients using MoviPrep® and 8.8% for patients using Colyte®. MoviPrep® was not associated with a significant difference in overall ADR (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78-1.11), AADR (OR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.87-1.62), or recommendation for early repeat colonoscopy (OR 1.16; 95% CI: 0.72-1.88).
MoviPrep® was associated with a small absolute increase in having a suboptimal preparation, but did not affect recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, or adenoma detection rates. Mechanisms to reduce financial barriers limiting low-volume preparations should be considered because of their favorable tolerability profile.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>28448598</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0176265</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9994-0323</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2017-04, Vol.12 (4), p.e0176265-e0176265 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1990008579 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Adenoma Adenoma - diagnosis Adenoma - surgery Cohort Studies Colon Colonoscopy Colonoscopy - methods Colorectal cancer Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery Electrolytes Engineering and Technology Female Gastroenterology Health care facilities Hepatology Humans Intestine Intestines - surgery Male Medicaid Medical diagnosis Medical screening Medicine and Health Sciences Middle Aged Patients Polyethylene Polyethylene glycol Polyethylene Glycols - chemistry Quality Quality assessment Regression analysis Regression models Retrospective Studies Solutions Time Factors Transplants & implants Tumors |
| title | A low-volume polyethylene glycol solution was associated with an increased suboptimal bowel preparation rate but had similar recommendations for an early repeat colonoscopy, procedure times, and adenoma detection rates |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T17%3A58%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20low-volume%20polyethylene%20glycol%20solution%20was%20associated%20with%20an%20increased%20suboptimal%20bowel%20preparation%20rate%20but%20had%20similar%20recommendations%20for%20an%20early%20repeat%20colonoscopy,%20procedure%20times,%20and%20adenoma%20detection%20rates&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Hankins,%20Sam%20C&rft.date=2017-04-27&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e0176265&rft.epage=e0176265&rft.pages=e0176265-e0176265&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0176265&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_plos_%3E1893552369%3C/proquest_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1990008579&rft_id=info:pmid/28448598&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_0a321a1cd68b49d9a85fcf88066fe126&rfr_iscdi=true |