de Moura Diogo Turiani, Guedes Hugo, Tortoretto Verônica, Arataque Tayrê Pádua, de Moura Eduardo Guimarães, Román Juan Pablo, Rodela Gustavo Luis, Artifon Everson L
Departamento de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Escuela de Medicina, Universidad de Sao Paulo. Sao Paulo, Brasil.
Universidad de Mogi das Cruzes. Sao Paulo, Brasil.
Rev Gastroenterol Peru. 2016 Oct-Dec;36(4):293-297.
The purpose of the present study is to compare intestinal preparation with mannitol and sodium picosulphate, assessing patient's acceptance, side effects and cleaning capacity.
This is a prospective, nom randomized, blind study, in which the evaluator had no information about the preparation applied. The sample obtained was divided into two groups according to the bowel preparation applied, with 153 patients prepared with 10% mannitol and 84 patients with sodium picosulfate. The evaluation of colon preparation was done using the Boston Scale (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale - BBP) through a three-point scoring system for each of the three regions of the colon: right, left and transverse colon.
Of the 237 patients that were evaluated, 146 (61.60%) were female and 91 (38.4%) were male. Regarding the group that used mannitol, 98 were female (64.05%) and 55 were male (35.95%). Among the patients who used sodium picosulfate, 48 were female (57.14%) and 36 were male (42.86%), with no statistical differences between both groups (p> 0.32). Considering that an adequate preparation scores ≥ 6 in the Boston Scale, the bowel cleansing preparation was satisfactory in both groups. 93% of the patients who used mannitol and 81% of the patients who used sodium picosulfate had adequate preparation (score of ≥ 6). Moreover, we consider that the average score in the preparation with Mannitol was 9, while the sodium picosulfate score was 7. There were no significant differences between the two groups.
There is consensus among authors who state that colonoscopy's safety and success are highly related to the cleansing outcome, regardless of the method used. The same can be observed in the present study, on which both preparations were proved safe and effective for bowel cleansing, according to the Boston scale, as well as accepted by patients and free of complications.
本研究旨在比较甘露醇和匹可硫酸钠的肠道准备效果,评估患者的接受程度、副作用及清洁能力。
这是一项前瞻性、非随机、盲法研究,评估者对所应用的肠道准备方法不知情。根据所应用的肠道准备方法,将获得的样本分为两组,153例患者使用10%甘露醇进行肠道准备,84例患者使用匹可硫酸钠。通过波士顿量表(Boston Bowel Preparation Scale - BBP)对结肠准备情况进行评估,该量表针对结肠的三个区域(右半结肠、左半结肠和横结肠)采用三分制评分系统。
在接受评估的237例患者中,146例(61.60%)为女性,91例(38.4%)为男性。使用甘露醇的组中,女性98例(64.05%),男性55例(35.95%)。使用匹可硫酸钠的患者中,女性48例(57.14%),男性36例(42.86%),两组之间无统计学差异(p>0.32)。考虑到在波士顿量表中,准备充分的评分≥6分,两组的肠道清洁准备情况均令人满意。使用甘露醇的患者中有93%准备充分(评分≥6分),使用匹可硫酸钠的患者中有81%准备充分。此外,我们认为使用甘露醇进行准备的平均评分为9分,而匹可硫酸钠的评分为7分。两组之间无显著差异。
作者们一致认为,无论使用何种方法,结肠镜检查的安全性和成功率与清洁效果高度相关。本研究也观察到了这一点,根据波士顿量表,两种准备方法在肠道清洁方面均被证明是安全有效的,并且患者能够接受,且无并发症。