Background. Optimal bowel preparation is one of the most important factors affecting the quality of colonoscopy. Several patient-related factors are known to influence the quality of bowel cleansing but randomized trials in this area are lacking. We aimed to compare an individualized bowel prep strategy based on patient characteristics to a standard preparation regimen.
Material and Methods. We conducted an endoscopist-blinded multicenter randomized control-trial. The Boston Bowel Prep Score (BBPS) was used to assess quality of bowel preparation and a 10 point visual analogue scale to assess patient comfort during bowel prep. Patients were randomised to either the standard regimens of split-dose 4L polyethylene-glycol (group A), split-dose sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate (group B) or to either of the two depending on their responses to a 3-item questionnaire (individualized preparation, group C).
Results. 185 patients were randomized during the study period and 143 patients were included in the final analysis. Patients in the individualized group had a median BBPS of 7 compared to a median of 6 in the standard group (p = 0.7). Also, there was no significant difference in patients’ comfort scores, irrespective of study group or laxative regimen. However, on multivariable analysis, a split-dose 4L polyethylene-glycol was an independent predictor for achieving a BBPS>6 (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4-9.8), regardless of patient-related factors.
Conclusion. The choice of laxative seems to be more important than patient-related factors in predicting bowel cleansing. Comfort during bowel prep is not influenced by the type of strategy used.
1. PULLENS HJ, SIERSEMA PD. Quality indicators for colonoscopy: Current insights and caveats. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014, 16; 6(12):571-83.
2. JOHNSON DA, BARKUN AN, COHEN LB, DOMINITZ JA, KALTENBACH T, MARTEL M AND THE US MULTISOCIETY TASK FORCE ON COLORECTAL CANCER. Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014; 109(10):1528-45.
3. LEBWOHL B, KASTRINOS F, GLICK M, ROSENBAUM AJ, WANG T, NEUGUT AI. The impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on adenoma miss rates and the factors associated with early repeat colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 73(6):1207-14.
4. FROEHLICH F., WIETLISBACH V., GONVERS J.J., BURNAND B, VADER JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European Multicenter Study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-84.
5. REMBACKEN B, HASSAN C, RIEMANN JF, CHILTON A, RUTTER M, DUMONCEAU JM, OMAR M, PONCHON T. Quality in screening colonoscopy: position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Endoscopy. 2012; 44(10):957-68.
6. YADLAPATI R, JOHNSTON ER, GREGORY DL, CIOLINO JD, COOPER A, KESWANI RN. Predictors of Inadequate Inpatient Colonoscopy Preparation and Its Association with Hospital Length of Stay and Costs. Dig Dis Sci. 2015; 60(11):3482-90.
7. MENEES SB, KIM HM, WREN P, ZIKMUND-FISHER BJ, ELTA GH, FOSTER S, KORSNES S, GRAUSTEIN B, SCHOENFELD P. Patient compliance and suboptimal bowel preparation with split-dose bowel regimen in average-risk screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014; 79(5):811-820.e3.
8. NESS RM, MANAM R, HOEN H, CHALASANI N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96:1797-1802.
9. KO CW, RIFFLE S, SHAPIRO JA, SAUNDERS MD, LEE SD, TUNG BY, KUVER R, LARSON AM, KOWDLEY KV, KIMMEY MB. Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 648-56.
10. BELSEY J, CROSTA C, EPSTEIN O, FISCHBACH W, LAYER P, PARENTE F, HALPHEN M. Meta-analysis: the relative efficacy of oral bowel preparations for colonoscopy 1985-2010. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2012; 35(2):222-37.
11. PARK SS, SINN DH, KIM Y-H, LIM YJ, SUN Y, LEE JH, KIM JY, CHANG DK, SON HJ, RHEE PL, RHEE JC, KIM JJ. Efficacy and tolerability of split-dose magnesium citrate: low-volume (2 liters) polyethylene glycol vs. single- or split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for morning colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1319-26.
12. KOJECKY V, DOLINA J, KIANICKA B, MISUREC M, VARGA M, LATTA J, VACULIN V. A single or split dose picosulphate/magnesium citrate before colonoscopy: comparison regarding tolerance and efficacy with polyethylene glycol. A randomized trial. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014; 23(2):141-6.
13. MUNSTERMAN ID, CLEEREN E, VAN DER PLOEG T, BROHET R, VAN DER HULST R. “Pico-Bello-Klean study”: effectiveness and patient tolerability of bowel preparation agents sodium picosulphate-magnesium citrate and polyethylene glycol before colonoscopy. A single-blinded randomized trial. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015; 27(1):29-38.
14. HASSAN C, BRETTHAUER M, KAMINSKI MF, POLKOWSKI M, REMBACKEN B, SAUNDERS B, BENAMOUZIG R, HOLME O, GREEN S, KUIPER T, MARMO R, OMAR M, PETRUZZIELLO L, SPADA C, ZULLO A, DUMONCEAU JM; European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy. 2013; 45(2):142-50.
15. VOIOSU T, RATIU I, VOIOSU A, IORDACHE T, SCHIPOR A, BAICUS C, SPOREA I, VOIOSU R. Time for individualized colonoscopy bowel-prep regimens? A randomized controlled trial comparing sodium picosulphate and magnesium citrate versus 4-liter split-dose polyethylene glycol. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2013; 22(2):129-34.
16. CALDERWOOD AH, JACOBSON BC. Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72:686-692.
17. CALDERWOOD AH, SCHROY PC 3RD, LIEBERMAN DA, LOGAN JR, ZURFLUH M, JACOBSON BC. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores provide a standardized definition of adequate for describing bowel cleanliness. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014; 80(2):269-76.
18. CHUNG YW, HAN DS, PARK KH, KIM KO, PARK CH, HAHN T, YOO KS, PARK SH, KIM JH, PARK CK. Patient factors predictive of inadequate bowel preparation using polyethylene glycol: a prospective study in Korea. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2009; 43(5):448-52.
19. LEBWOHL B, WANG TC, NEUGUT AI. Socioeconomic and other predictors of colonoscopy preparation quality. Dig Dis Sci. 2010; 55(7):2014-20.
20. YEE R, MANOHARAN S, HALL C, HAYASHI A. Optimizing bowel preparation for colonoscopy: what are the predictors of an inadequate preparation? Am J Surg. 2015; 209(5):787-92.
21. BUCCI C, ROTONDANO G, HASSAN C, REA M, BIANCO MA, CIPOLLETTA L, CIACCI C, MARMO R. Optimal bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: split the dose! A series of meta-analyses of controlled studies. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014; 80(4):566-576.
22. MARTEL M, BARKUN AN, MENARD C, RESTELLINI S, KHERAD O, VANASSE A. Split-Dose Preparations Are Superior to Day-Before Bowel Cleansing Regimens: A Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2015; 149(1):79-88.
23. ROTONDANO G, RISPO A, BOTTIGLIERI ME, DE LUCA L, LAMANDA R, ORSINI L, BRUZZESE D, GALLORO G; SIED Campania PISCoPO study group investigators. Quality of bowel cleansing in hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy: A multicentre prospective regional study. Dig Liver Dis. 2015; 47(8):669-74.
24. HAUTEFEUILLE G, LAPUELLE J, CHAUSSADE S, PONCHON T, MOLARD BR, COULOM P, LAUGIER R, HENRI F, CADIOT G. Factors related to bowel cleansing failure before colonoscopy: Results of the PACOME study. United European Gastroenterol J. 2014; 2(1):22-9.
25. MODI C, DEPASQUALE JR, DIGIACOMO WS, MALINOWSKI JE, ENGELHARDT K, SHAIKH SN, KOTHARI ST, KOTTAM R, SHAKOV R, MAKSOUD C, BADDOURA WJ, SPIRA RS. Impact of patient education on quality of bowel preparation in outpatient colonoscopies. Qual Prim Care. 2009; 17(6):397-404.
26. CHANG CW, SHIH SC, WANG HY, CHU CH, WANG TE, HUNG CY, SHIEH TY, LIN YS, CHEN MJ. Meta-analysis: The effect of patient education on bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Endosc Int Open. 2015; 3(6):E646-52.
27. YADLAPATI R, JOHNSTON ER, GREGORY DL, CIOLINO JD, COOPER A, KESWANI RN. Predictors of inadequate inpatient colonoscopy preparation and its association with hospital length of stay and costs. Dig Dis Sci. 2015; 60(11):3482-90.