ObjectiveIn this randomized clinical trial, we have compared the Shudh™ colon cleanse (SCC) with HalfLytely® colon prep (HCP) to evaluate the efficacy, bowel preparation time (BPT), adverse events, electrolyte abnormalities and patient acceptability.MethodsPatients were randomized to receive either SCC (n = 65) or HCP (n = 68). All colonoscopies were performed by a single, blinded endoscopist. Colon prep was evaluated on a 5 point grading scale. Statistical non-inferiority was pre-defined as a difference of <15 % in the lower limit of the 95.5 % confidence interval for the treatment difference. Data that were collected include bowel prep score, BPT, adverse events, electrolyte abnormalities and patient acceptability.ResultsBowel preparation efficacy was rated as “successful” for 59/65 (90.7 %) in SCC versus 66/68 (97.1 %) in HCP. This gave a success difference of −6.4 % with a 1-sided 95 % lower confidence limit (LCI) for the difference = −13.3 % (non-inferiority p = 0.25). This difference fell within the predefined limit for non-inferiority. The average BPT for SCC was 1.9 h versus 10.9 in HCP (p < 0.001). No serious adverse events were reported in either group. None of the patients in either group had any clinically significant electrolyte imbalance. Patient ratings for palatability and willingness to repeat were significantly better for SCC (p < 0.05).ConclusionSCC was found to not be inferior to PEG with regards to the quality of bowel preparation. It is worth highlighting that a major advantage of SCC is shorter BPT. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01547130).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10620-013-2598-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
IntroductionMost colonoscopies are completed in the left lateral (LL) position but in cases of suboptimal caecal preparation, changing the patient’s position to supine (S) and, if needed, to right lateral (RL) improves caecal intubation rate, mucosal visibility, and adenoma detection.AimTo determine if position change during colonoscopy facilitates optimal visualisation of the caecum.Material and methodsA total of 359 patients were grouped into three categories based on the initial caecal intubation position. After caecal intubation, caecal visibility was scored on a four-point scale depending on the number of imaginary quadrants of the caecum completely visualized – Arya Caecal Prep Score. A score of 1 or 2 was unsatisfactory, while 3 or 4 was considered satisfactory. In patients with unsatisfactory score, position was changed from LL to S and then RL and visibility was scored again.ResultsThe initial caecal intubation in the LL position was achieved in 66.8% of patients, S in 28.5%, and RL in 4.8% of patients. 84.5% (300/355) of patients had an acceptable visualisation score at the initial caecal intubation position. Of the 55 patients with unsatisfactory caecum visualisation scores in the initial intubation position, 30 (8.5%) had satisfactory scores after the first position change (95% CI: 5.77–11.84). Twenty-five (7.04%) subjects required two position changes (95% CI: 4.61–10.22%). An additional 9.3% (11/118) of adenomas were detected in caecum and ascending colon following position change.ConclusionsChanging patient position improves caecal intubation rate, mucosal visibility, and adenoma detection.
Saliva is known to be protective for esophageal mucosa. Increased chewing strokes result in a quantitative and qualitative enhancement of saliva. Reduction in the amount of saliva produced results in an increased incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which can be objectively measured by the DeMeester score. The impact of increased chewing strokes on the DeMeester score remains largely unknown, thus this study aimed to find out their impact on the value of the DeMeester score and its individual components.The effect of increased chewing strokes on the DeMeester score was investigated in 12 subjects (5 male and 7 female) who were diagnosed with GERD. All subjects underwent a 48-hour pH monitoring using the Bravo® pH capsule. All the patients chewed their food 20 times more on Day 2 as compared to Day 1. The data were analyzed for change in the DeMeester score and its individual components in 2 days.In patients with GERD (DeMeester score > 14.72 on Day 1), the number of long refluxes (>5 minutes) on Day 2 (mean = 3.2, SD = 2.3) was significantly lower than on Day 1 (mean = 6.4, SD = 2.7); Z = -2.032, p = 0.04. Though, the DeMeester score and its other individual parameters decreased on Day 2, they were not statistically significant.In patients with GERD, increased chewing strokes lead to a decrease in the number of long reflux episodes. Though there is a decrease in the DeMeester score and its other individual components, larger randomized controlled studies are required to reach statistical significance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.