Bowel Cleansing Agents in Clinical Practice: A Cross-Sectional Study on Safety, Efficacy, and Predictor of Good Bowel Preparation

ABSTRACT

Background: A good bowel preparation for colonoscopy is the most important factor that has an impact on visualization and outcome of the procedure. Aim: The primary aim of the study was to assess the quality of bowel preparation as reported by the Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS). The secondary aim of the study was to analyze the patient feedback on ease of administration, palatability, and side effects with the bowel preparation. Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing colonoscopy between March 2018 and September 2018 were enrolled in the study. Patients <18 years of age, those with the previous history of colorectal surgery, emergency procedures in an unprepared colon, and those not willing to participate were excluded from the study. Colon preparation of the patient was decided by senior consultants. A predesigned pro forma that included demography, indication for the procedure, preparation details, dietary recommendations the previous day if any, side effects, and patient’s comfort to preparation was completed by two-independent observers. The BBPS was used to assess the bowel preparation. A score of <5 was deemed inadequate. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The study cohort consisted of 141 patients, of which 78 were male (55.3%). Eighty (56.7%) patients received oral sulfate-based preparation and 61(43.4%) polyethylene glycol-based preparation. Nearly one third of cases reported the solution to be non palatable. 15.4% respondents reported nausea, vomiting and bloating as the major side effects of the preparation. The median duration of colonoscopy was 25 min (8–45 min). One hundred and eighteen patients (83.6%) had a BBPS score of ≥5. Sulfate preparation resulted in better bowel cleansing (P = 0.01). Age, gender, and dosing schedule of preparation, including bedtime dosing of stimulant laxative, did not alter the BBPS score. Conclusion: Sulfate- and polyethylene glycol-based preparations are commonly used for cleansing the colon. Bowel cleansing was adequate in most patients and sulfate-based yielded better bowel cleansing. Nearly 15.4% of patients reported side effects to these preparations.

KEYWORDS

Bowel - cleansing - colonoscopy - polyethylene glycol

• REFERENCES

• 1 Hassan C, Bretthauer M, Kaminski MF, Polkowski M, Rembacken B, Saunders B. et al. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 142-50
• 2 Harewood GC, Sharma VK, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 58: 76-9
• 3 Chokshi RV, Hovis CE, Hollander T, Early DS, Wang JS. Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 1197-203
• 4 Parra-Blanco A, Nicolas-Perez D, Gimeno-Garcia A, Grosso B, Jimenez A, Ortega J. et al. The timing of bowel preparation before colonoscopy determines the quality of cleansing, and is a significant factor contributing to the detection of flat lesions: A randomized study. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 6161-6
• 5 Chiu HM, Lin JT, Lee YC, Liang JT, Shun CT, Wang HP. et al. Different bowel preparation schedule leads to different diagnostic yield of proximal and nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasm at screening colonoscopy in average-risk population. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54: 1570-7
• 6 Sharara AI, Abou Mrad RR. The modern bowel preparation in colonoscopy. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2013; 42: 577-98
• 7 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, Levin TR, Burt RW, Johnson DA. et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: Recommendations of the US. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1296-308
• 8 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: A valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-5
• 9 Davis GR, Santa Ana CA, Morawski SG, Fordtran JS. Development of a lavage solution associated with minimal water and electrolyte absorption or secretion. Gastroenterology 1980; 78: 991-5
• 10 Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH, Fanelli RD, Hyman N, Shen B. et al. 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). Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 894-909
• 11 Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbach D. Systematic review: Adverse event reports for oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2009; 29: 15-28
• 12 Rex DK, Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M. A randomized clinical study comparing reduced-volume oral sulfate solution with standard 4-liter sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution as preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 328-36
• 13 Aihara H, Saito S, Ohya T, Tamai N, Kato T, Tajiri H. A pilot study using reduced–volume oral sulfate solution as a preparation for colonoscopy among a Japanese population. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013; 28: 83-7
• 14 Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbach D. Systematic review: Oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 25: 373-84
• 15 Adams WJ, Meagher AP, Lubowski DZ, King DW. Bisacodyl reduces the volume of polyethylene glycol solution required for bowel preparation. Dis Colon Rectum 1994; 37: 229-33
• 16 Brady 3rd CE, DiPalma JA, Pierson WP. Golytely lavage – Is metoclopramide necessary?. Am J Gastroenterol 1985; 80: 180-4
• 17 Regev A, Fraser G, Delpre G, Leiser A, Neeman A, Maoz E. et al. Comparison of two bowel preparations for colonoscopy: Sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate versus sulphate-free polyethylene glycol lavage solution. Am J Gastroenterol 1998; 93: 1478-82
• 18 Love J, Bernard EJ, Cockeram A, Cohen L, Fishman M, Gray J. et al. A multicentre, observational study of sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate as a precolonoscopy bowel preparation. Can J Gastroenterol 2009; 23: 706-10
• 19 Jun JH, Han KH, Park JK, Seo HI, Kim YD, Lee SJ. et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing fixed-time split dosing and split dosing of oral picosulfate regimen for bowel preparation. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23: 5986-93
• 20 Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM. American college of gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 739-50
• 21 Matro R, Shnitser A, Spodik M, Daskalakis C, Katz L, Murtha A. et al. Efficacy of morning-only compared with split-dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution for afternoon colonoscopy: A randomized controlled single-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1954-61
• 22 Reilly T, Walker G. Reasons for poor colonic preparation with inpatients. Gastroenterol Nurs 2004; 27: 115-7
• 23 Park DI, Park SH, Lee SK, Baek YH, Han DS, Eun CS. et al. Efficacy of prepackaged, low residual test meals with 4L polyethylene glycol versus a clear liquid diet with 4L polyethylene glycol bowel preparation: A randomized trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 24: 988-91
• 24 Sipe BW, Fischer M, Baluyut AR, Bishop RH, Born LJ, Daugherty DF. et al. A low-residue diet improved patient satisfaction with split–dose oral sulfate solution without impairing colonic preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 932-6