Increasing the low residue diet to 3 days does not improve the bowel cleansing in hard to prepare patients: Post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial

  1. Hernández, Anjara
  2. Quintero, Enrique 1
  3. Reygosa, Cristina
  4. Alarcon-Fernández, Onofre
  5. Adrian, Zaida
  6. Hernández, Alberto
  7. Lara, Antonio J.
  8. Mascareño, Isabel
  9. Nicolás-Pérez, David
  10. Felipe, Vanessa
  11. Alonso, Inmaculada
  12. Hernandez, Domingo
  13. de la Barreda-Heuser, Raquel
  14. Amaral, Carla
  15. Jiménez, Alejandro
  16. Delgado, Rosa
  17. Hernandez, Goretti
  18. Romero, Rafael
  19. Hernandez-Guerra, Manuel 1
  20. González, Yanira
  21. Gimeno-García, Antonio Z.
  22. Baute, José Luis
  1. 1 Universidad de La Laguna
    info

    Universidad de La Laguna

    San Cristobal de La Laguna, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01r9z8p25

Journal:
Gastroenterología y Hepatología

ISSN: 0210-5705

Year of publication: 2021

Volume: 44

Issue: 3

Pages: 183-190

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2020.06.016 GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Abstract

Background: Recent evidence suggests that the number of low residue diet (LRD) days does not influence the bowel cleansing quality in non-selected patients. However, there are not data in the subgroup of patients with risk factors of inadequate bowel cleansing. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess whether a 3-day LRD improved the bowel cleansing quality in patients with risk factors of poor bowel cleansing. Patients and methods: Post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial carried out between December 2017 and March 2018 in a tertiary care hospital. Patients with high risk of poor bowel cleansing were selected following a validated score. The patients were randomized to the 1-day LRD or 3-day LRD groups. All patients received a 2-L split-dose of polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses were conducted for the main outcome. Results: 135 patients (1-day LRD group = 67, 3-day LRD = 68) were included. The rate of adequate cleansing quality was not significantly different between the groups in the ITT analysis: 76.1%, 95% CI: [64.6–84.8] vs. 79.4%, 95% CI: [68.2–87.4]; odds ratio (OR) 1.2, 95% CI [0.54–2.73]) or in the PP analysis: 77.3%, 95% CI: [65.7–85.8] vs. 80.3%, 95% CI: [69.0–88.3]; OR 1.2, 95% CI [0.52–2.77]). Compliance with the diet or cleansing solution, satisfaction or difficulties with the LRD and the polyp/adenoma detection rates were not significantly different. Conclusion: Our results suggest that 1-day LRD is not inferior to 3-day LRD in patients with risk factors of inadequate bowel cleansing

Bibliographic References

  • Johnson, (2014), Gastroenterology, 147, pp. 903, 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002
  • Kaminski, (2017), Endoscopy, 49, pp. 378, 10.1055/s-0043-103411
  • Hernández, (2019), Gastroenterol Hepatol, 42, pp. 326, 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2019.01.010
  • Hassan, (2019), Endoscopy, 51, pp. 775, 10.1055/a-0959-0505
  • Gimeno-García, (2019), Endoscopy, 51, pp. 628, 10.1055/a-0864-1942
  • Gimeno-García, (2017), Endoscopy, 49, pp. 536, 10.1055/s-0043-101683
  • Longstreth, (2006), Gastroenterology, 130, pp. 1480, 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.11.061
  • Lai, (2009), Gastrointest Endosc, 69, pp. 620, 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057
  • Cotton, (2010), Gastrointest Endosc, 71, pp. 446, 10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.027
  • Reeves, (2015), Nutr Diet, 72, pp. 368, 10.1111/1747-0080.12160
  • Hatoum, (2016), Patient, 9, pp. 27, 10.1007/s40271-015-0154-8
  • Aronchick, (2000), Gastrointest Endosc, 52, pp. 346, 10.1067/mge.2000.108480
  • Hassan, (2013), Endoscopy, 45, pp. 142, 10.1055/s-0032-1326186