PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J J Pineda

Publications and source records attributed to J J Pineda.

3 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1995

Prospective, randomized trial comparing a new sodium phosphate-bisacodyl regimen with conventional PEG-ES lavage for outpatient colonoscopy preparation.

BACKGROUND: Several recent trials have shown that colonoscopy preparation with sodium phosphate solution is as effective and at least as well tolerated as conventional PEG-ES lavage. These trials utilized two 1.5-fluid oz doses, one given on the evening before colonoscopy and the other early the next morning. METHODS: We devised a new sodium phosphate regimen in which the entire dose was given on the evening before examination (1.5 fl oz at 4 PM, 1.5-fl oz at 7 PM and 10 mg of bisacodyl at 10 PM) and performed a prospective, randomized trial that compared it with conventional PEG-ES lavage in terms of quality of colon cleansing, patient tolerance, and safety in an outpatient colonoscopy population with normal renal function. Seventy-two patients received sodium phosphate-bisacodyl and 75 PEG-ES lavage. RESULTS: The overall quality of colon cleansing and frequency of unsatisfactory preparations were similar with both methods. Patients found preparation with sodium phosphate-bisacodyl to be easier than PEG-ES lavage (p = 0.005). No clinically important adverse effects were seen with either method of preparation. The average cost of sodium phosphate-bisacodyl was $4.32 per patient compared with $18.15 for PEG-ES lavage preparation. CONCLUSION: Preparation with sodium phosphate-bisacodyl, given on the evening before colonoscopy, is a well-tolerated, efficacious, and cost-effective alternative to conventional PEG-ES lavage.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Prospective, randomized trial comparing sodium phosphate solution with polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage for colonoscopy preparation.

We performed a prospective randomized trial in a predominantly outpatient colonoscopy population to see how preparation with oral sodium phosphate solution compares with polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage in terms of the quality of colon cleansing, ease of preparation, and gastrointestinal intolerance. Before colonoscopy, a nurse administered a questionnaire to the patient to assess how well the preparation was tolerated (scale from 1 to 5:1 = easy, to 5 = unable to finish) and about the presence of four symptoms: abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness. The quality of colon cleansing was graded by the attending gastroenterologist, who was unaware of how the patient was prepared or tolerated the preparation (1 = excellent, 2 = good, 3 = fair, 4 = poor). The overall quality of bowel preparation with polyethylene glycol lavage was slightly better than with sodium phosphate (mean score, 1.93 vs 2.07); however, the difference was not statistically different. No statistical difference was seen in the frequency of patients with poor preparations (14.2% for sodium phosphate, 9.6% for polyethylene glycol lavage). Patients found preparation with sodium phosphate to be somewhat easier than polyethylene glycol lavage (mean score, 2.07 vs 2.41; p = 0.05). No difference was seen in the incidence of abdominal pain, nausea, or vomiting. Dizziness was more common with sodium phosphate but was mild and not believed to be clinically important. We conclude that the quality of colon cleansing is similar with polyethylene glycol lavage and oral sodium phosphate solution, with satisfactory preparation seen in 85% to 90% of patients. Patients found preparation with sodium phosphate to be slightly easier to tolerate.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Administration, Oral↗