Yazar "Yavuz, Asli" seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
  • Küçük Resim
    Öğe
    The comparison of efficacy and tolerability of two bowel preparation agents in children: polyethylene glycol vs sodium phosphate
    (DergiPark, 2020) Aydemir, Yusuf; Baris, Zeren; Yurttas, Gozde Nur; Yavuz, Asli; Eren, Makbule
    Abstract: Adequate bowel cleansing with a good patient tolerability is important for high-quality and safe colonoscopy. We aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of an osmotic agent, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and a less frequently used stimulant agent, sodium phosphate (NP) for pediatric patients. We analyzed the records of pediatric patients who underwent colonoscopy and used either PEG or NP for bowel cleansing between January 2016 and December 2019. The patient tolerability of bowel preparation was assessed using a patient questionnaire that consisted of acceptance and adverse events, recording abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, dizziness and severity of these symptoms. The quality of bowel preparation was assessed according to the Ottawa scale, including cleanliness and fluid quantity. The colonoscopic video records were retrospectively and blindly evaluated for Ottawa scale. There were a total of 145 patients (65 boys, 44.8%) with a mean age of 12.3±4.2 years. PEG was used in 93 patients (64.1%), while NP was used in 52 patients (35.9%). The mean age of the patients was significantly lower in PEG group (11.2±4.6 years) when compared to NP group (14.2±2.7 years) (p<0.0001). The patients who used PEG had significantly better tolerance without any complaints when compared to the patients who used NP (49/93 patients (52.7%) vs 14/52 patients (26.9%), respectively, p=0.003). Regarding the severity of symptoms in patients who had adverse events, the NP group had significantly more frequent moderate-severe side effects when compared to PEG group (15/52 patients (28.8%) vs 15/93 patients (16.1%), respectively, p=0.014). One of the children in NP group had severe hyperphosphatemia, which required fluid resuscitation. Regarding the efficacy of the preparations, 39/93 (41.9%) of the patients in PEG group had required wash and suctioning in any segments of the colon, this ratio was significantly lower in NP group (12/52 (23%)), (p=0.029). The Ottawa bowel preparation quality score in right colon and total Ottawa scale rating was significantly better in NP group when compared to PEG group (p=0.009 and 0.034, respectively). The Ottawa scores in mid and rectosigmoid colons were not significantly different between two groups. As conclusion, NP is more efficient in bowel cleansing when compared to PEG. But PEG had less frequent moderate-severe side effects compared to NP. Additionally, NP should be carefully used in selected cases where other bowel cleansing methods cannot be used, because of the severe side effects like hyperphosphatemia in children.