PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16644451

Preparations and prokinetics.

Abstract

The evaluation of the importance of bowel preparations, prokinetics and postural tricks for bowel cleanliness, completeness of evaluation, and ultimately for the diagnostic yield of VCE is hampered by several factors. First, most studies are published in abstract form. Second, the methodological quality of the studies is rather low, because randomized comparisons are only a small minority. Third,there is no accepted and validated scale to evaluate bowel cleanliness. For all of these reasons, comparisons between studies are very difficult, and drawing general conclusions is almost impossible. As a consequence, at the Fifth International Conference on Capsule Endoscopy [9], only a limited measure of consensus could be reached on the fact that preparations/prokinetics probably improve the quality of small bowel cleanliness. It also was agreed that it is possible that preps/prokinetics improve GTT, SBTT and completeness of examination, and that keeping the patients recumbent in the right lateral position may shorten the GTT. It was noted, however, that the best type of preparation, and dose and time of administration remain to be determined. Additionally, data on prokinetics and postural tricks are insufficient to reach a firm conclusion. Unanswered questions concern the effect of medications on the diagnostic yield of VCE, whether prokinetics increase the miss rate, whether preparations/prokinetics cause adverse effects and the influence of medications on patient acceptance.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Federica Villa, Clementina Signorelli, Emanuele Rondonotti, Roberto de Franchis. 2006. Preparations and prokinetics.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giec.2006.01.020

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Clinical experience with the hygienic reprocessing of rigid endoscopes lacking a working channel with reference to practicability in clinical routine].

BACKGROUND: Contaminated medical products may be vectors for infections. A safe disinfection method for the optical instruments used by ENT specialists is undoubtedly needed. So far, a standard method that sufficiently covers the risk of infection for patients and medical staff alike, while serving the need of practicability in daily routine, has not been established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the ENT departments of the Mannheim and Kaiserslautern hospitals, a study on the practicability of disinfection rigid optical instruments lacking working channels was conducted using cleaning and disinfection automats. A total of 735 patients were examined (Hopkins 30 degrees and 70 degrees) and the endoscopes subsequently sterilized using a cleaning and disinfection automat. RESULTS: Each cleaning cycle took about 40 min. Examining 70-100 patients a day, a minimum of eight 70 degrees Hopkins endoscopes would be needed. CONCLUSION: The sterilization of medical products such as endoscopes is the best practice, but certain hindrances, such as loss of time and costs involved, complicate its general application.

Endoscopes, Gastrointestinal↗