Yi Li-Juan, Tian Xu, Shi Bing, Chen Hui, Liu Xiao-Ling, Pi Yuan-Ping, Chen Wei-Qing
Department of Nursing, Hunan Traditional Chinese Medical College, Zhuzhou, China.
Chongqing Key Laboratory of Translational Research for Cancer Metastasis and Individualized Treatment, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital and Chongqing Cancer Institute and Chongqing Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2019 May 6;6:92. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2019.00092. eCollection 2019.
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been regarded as the primary recommendation for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. However, a conclusive conclusion has not yet been generated. We performed this updated meta-analysis to further investigate the comparative efficacy and safety of low volume preparation based on PEG plus ascorbic acid related to 4L PEG. A systematic search was conducted to retrieve potential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from January 2000 to April 2018. Two independent searchers critically searched all potential citations, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias accordingly. Moreover, we used the STATA 12.0 and trial sequential analysis (TSA) 0.9 to complete all analyses. A total of 13 RCTs enrolling 3,910 patients met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis based on PP analysis indicated that compared to standard volume PEG regime, low volume regime improved patient compliance RR = 1.01; 95% CIs = 1.00, 1.03; = 0.143 (≥75% intake); RR = 1.07; 95% CIs = 1.00, 1.14; = 0.046 (100% intake), the willingness to repeat the same regime (RR = 1.30; 95% CIs = 1.07, 157; = 0.007), and patient acceptability (RR = 1.18; 95% CIs = 1.07, 1.29; = 0.001), and decreased the overall adverse events (RR = 0.86; 95% CIs = 0.77, 0.96; = 0.009). However, no difference was observed between these two different solutions for bowel preparation efficacy (RR = 0.98; 95% CIs = 0.95, 1.02; = 0.340). These all results were further confirmed by TSA. The effect of low volume regime was not inferior to the standard volume PEG regime, and low volume regime was associated with better compliance when subjects ingested all the solution, willingness to repeat the same regime, higher acceptability, and lower nausea in non-selected population.
聚乙二醇(PEG)一直被视为结肠镜检查前肠道准备的主要推荐方法。然而,尚未得出确凿结论。我们进行了这项更新的荟萃分析,以进一步研究基于PEG加抗坏血酸的低容量制剂与4L PEG相比的疗效和安全性。我们在PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)中进行了系统检索,以获取2000年1月至2018年4月期间潜在的随机对照试验(RCT)。两名独立检索者严格筛选所有潜在文献,提取数据,并相应评估偏倚风险。此外,我们使用STATA 12.0和试验序贯分析(TSA)0.9完成所有分析。共有13项纳入3910例患者的RCT符合纳入标准。基于PP分析的荟萃分析表明,与标准容量PEG方案相比,低容量方案提高了患者依从性(RR = 1.01;95%CI = 1.00,1.03;P = 0.143(摄入量≥75%);RR = 1.07;95%CI = 1.00,1.14;P = 0.046(摄入量100%))、重复相同方案的意愿(RR = 1.30;95%CI = 1.07,1.57;P = 0.007)和患者可接受性(RR = 1.18;95%CI = 1.07,1.29;P = 0.001),并减少了总体不良事件(RR = 0.86;95%CI = 0.77,0.96;P = 0.009)。然而,在这两种不同的肠道准备溶液的疗效方面未观察到差异(RR = 0.98;95%CI = 0.95,1.02;P = 0.340)。TSA进一步证实了所有这些结果。低容量方案的效果不劣于标准容量PEG方案,并且在非选择人群中,当受试者摄入所有溶液时,低容量方案具有更好的依从性、重复相同方案的意愿、更高的可接受性和更低的恶心发生率。