Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Müller,Suzana
Data de Publicação: 2007
Outros Autores: Francesconi,Carlos Fernando de Magalhães, Maguilnik,Ismael, Breyer,Helenice Pankowsky
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300013
Resumo: BACKGROUND: The cleansing of the colon for a colonoscopy exam must be complete so as to allow the visualization and inspection of the intestinal lumen. The ideal cleansing agent should be easily administered, have a low cost, and minimum collateral effects. Sodium picosulfate together with the magnesium citrate is a cathartic stimulant and mannitol is an osmotic laxative, both usually used for this purpose. AIMS: Assess the colon cleanliness comparing the use of mannitol and sodium picosulfate as well as evaluate the level of patient satisfaction, the presence of foam, pain, and abdominal distension in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind study with 80 patients that compared two groups: mannitol (40) and sodium picosulfate (40). Both groups received the same dietary orientation. The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics and Research Committee. The endoscopist was blind to the type of preparation. Outcomes evaluated: level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain and distension, and the duration of the exam. The data was analyzed by means of the chi-squared test for proportions and Mann-Whitney for independent samples. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in relation to the level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain, and the duration of the exam. Fifteen percent of the exams of the mannitol group were interrupted while from the sodium picosulfate group it was 5%. The presence of foam was similar for both groups. The average duration for carrying out the exam was 28.44 minutes for the mannitol group and 35.59 minutes for the sodium picosulfate group. Abdominal distension was more frequent in the mannitol group. If they would have to do the same exam, the answer was that 80% said yes from the mannitol group and 92.5% from the sodium picosulfate group. CONCLUSION: The quality of the colon preparation, foam formation, exam duration, and the collateral effects (nauseas, vomiting, and abdominal pain) were similar in both kinds of preparations. Abdominal distension was greater in the mannitol group. Both methods of preparation were well accepted by the hospitalized patients.
id IBEPEGE-1_953b9ca81af08f57e316b78016087bd4
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-28032007000300013
network_acronym_str IBEPEGE-1
network_name_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patientsColonoscopyMannitolPicolinesInpatientsBACKGROUND: The cleansing of the colon for a colonoscopy exam must be complete so as to allow the visualization and inspection of the intestinal lumen. The ideal cleansing agent should be easily administered, have a low cost, and minimum collateral effects. Sodium picosulfate together with the magnesium citrate is a cathartic stimulant and mannitol is an osmotic laxative, both usually used for this purpose. AIMS: Assess the colon cleanliness comparing the use of mannitol and sodium picosulfate as well as evaluate the level of patient satisfaction, the presence of foam, pain, and abdominal distension in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind study with 80 patients that compared two groups: mannitol (40) and sodium picosulfate (40). Both groups received the same dietary orientation. The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics and Research Committee. The endoscopist was blind to the type of preparation. Outcomes evaluated: level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain and distension, and the duration of the exam. The data was analyzed by means of the chi-squared test for proportions and Mann-Whitney for independent samples. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in relation to the level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain, and the duration of the exam. Fifteen percent of the exams of the mannitol group were interrupted while from the sodium picosulfate group it was 5%. The presence of foam was similar for both groups. The average duration for carrying out the exam was 28.44 minutes for the mannitol group and 35.59 minutes for the sodium picosulfate group. Abdominal distension was more frequent in the mannitol group. If they would have to do the same exam, the answer was that 80% said yes from the mannitol group and 92.5% from the sodium picosulfate group. CONCLUSION: The quality of the colon preparation, foam formation, exam duration, and the collateral effects (nauseas, vomiting, and abdominal pain) were similar in both kinds of preparations. Abdominal distension was greater in the mannitol group. Both methods of preparation were well accepted by the hospitalized patients.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2007-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300013Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.44 n.3 2007reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/S0004-28032007000300013info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMüller,SuzanaFrancesconi,Carlos Fernando de MagalhãesMaguilnik,IsmaelBreyer,Helenice Pankowskyeng2007-11-27T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032007000300013Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2007-11-27T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
title Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
spellingShingle Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
Müller,Suzana
Colonoscopy
Mannitol
Picolines
Inpatients
title_short Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
title_full Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
title_fullStr Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
title_full_unstemmed Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
title_sort Randomized clinical trial comparing sodium picosulfate with mannitol on the preparation FOR colonoscopy in hospitalized patients
author Müller,Suzana
author_facet Müller,Suzana
Francesconi,Carlos Fernando de Magalhães
Maguilnik,Ismael
Breyer,Helenice Pankowsky
author_role author
author2 Francesconi,Carlos Fernando de Magalhães
Maguilnik,Ismael
Breyer,Helenice Pankowsky
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Müller,Suzana
Francesconi,Carlos Fernando de Magalhães
Maguilnik,Ismael
Breyer,Helenice Pankowsky
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Colonoscopy
Mannitol
Picolines
Inpatients
topic Colonoscopy
Mannitol
Picolines
Inpatients
description BACKGROUND: The cleansing of the colon for a colonoscopy exam must be complete so as to allow the visualization and inspection of the intestinal lumen. The ideal cleansing agent should be easily administered, have a low cost, and minimum collateral effects. Sodium picosulfate together with the magnesium citrate is a cathartic stimulant and mannitol is an osmotic laxative, both usually used for this purpose. AIMS: Assess the colon cleanliness comparing the use of mannitol and sodium picosulfate as well as evaluate the level of patient satisfaction, the presence of foam, pain, and abdominal distension in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind study with 80 patients that compared two groups: mannitol (40) and sodium picosulfate (40). Both groups received the same dietary orientation. The study was approved by the hospital’s Ethics and Research Committee. The endoscopist was blind to the type of preparation. Outcomes evaluated: level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain and distension, and the duration of the exam. The data was analyzed by means of the chi-squared test for proportions and Mann-Whitney for independent samples. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in relation to the level of the colon’s cleanliness, patient’s satisfaction, the presence of foam, abdominal pain, and the duration of the exam. Fifteen percent of the exams of the mannitol group were interrupted while from the sodium picosulfate group it was 5%. The presence of foam was similar for both groups. The average duration for carrying out the exam was 28.44 minutes for the mannitol group and 35.59 minutes for the sodium picosulfate group. Abdominal distension was more frequent in the mannitol group. If they would have to do the same exam, the answer was that 80% said yes from the mannitol group and 92.5% from the sodium picosulfate group. CONCLUSION: The quality of the colon preparation, foam formation, exam duration, and the collateral effects (nauseas, vomiting, and abdominal pain) were similar in both kinds of preparations. Abdominal distension was greater in the mannitol group. Both methods of preparation were well accepted by the hospitalized patients.
publishDate 2007
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2007-09-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300013
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300013
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0004-28032007000300013
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.44 n.3 2007
reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron:IBEPEGE
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron_str IBEPEGE
institution IBEPEGE
reponame_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
collection Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br
_version_ 1754193344283541504