Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography

Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate

Alexander W. Keedy, Judy Yee, Rizwan Aslam, Stefanie Weinstein, Luis A. Landeras, Janak N. Shah, Kenneth R. McQuaid, Benjamin M. Yeh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To prospectively compare adequacy of colonic cleansing, adequacy of solid stool and fluid tagging, and patient acceptance by using reduced-volume, 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) versus magnesium citrate bowel preparations for CT colonography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional Committee on Human Research and was compliant with HIPAA; all patients provided written consent. In this randomized, investigatorblinded study, 50 patients underwent oral preparation with either a 2-L PEG or a magnesium citrate solution, tagging with oral contrast agents, and subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy. The residual stool (score 0 [best] to 3 [worst]) and fluid (score 0 [best] to 4 [worst]) burden and tagging adequacy were qualitatively assessed. Residual fluid attenuation was recorded as a quantitative measure of tagging adequacy. Patients completed a tolerance questionnaire within 2 weeks of scanning. Preparations were compared for residual stool and fluid by using generalized estimating equations; the Mann- Whitney test was used to compare the qualitative tagging score, mean residual fluid attenuation, and adverse effects assessed on the patient experience questionnaire. Results: The mean residual stool (0.90 of three) and fluid burden (1.05 of four) scores for PEG were similar to those for magnesium citrate (0.96 [ P =.58] and 0.98 [ P =.48], respectively). However, the mean fecal and fluid tagging scores were significantly better for PEG (0.48 and 0.28, respectively) than for magnesium citrate (1.52 [ P < .01] and 1.28 [ P < .01], respectively). Mean residual fluid attenuation was higher for PEG (765 HU) than for magnesium citrate (443 HU, P =.01), and mean interpretation time was shorter for PEG (14.8 minutes) than for magnesium citrate (18.0 minutes, P =.04). Tolerance ratings were not significantly different between preparations. Conclusion: Reduced-volume PEG and magnesium citrate bowel preparations demonstrated adequate cleansing effectiveness for CT colonography, with better tagging and shorter interpretation time observed in the PEG group. Adequate polyp detection was maintained but requires further validation because of the small number of clinically important polyps.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)156-164
Number of pages9
JournalRadiology
Volume261
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cathartics
Computed Tomographic Colonography
Polyps
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
magnesium citrate
Colonoscopy
Contrast Media

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography : Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate. / Keedy, Alexander W.; Yee, Judy; Aslam, Rizwan; Weinstein, Stefanie; Landeras, Luis A.; Shah, Janak N.; McQuaid, Kenneth R.; Yeh, Benjamin M.

In: Radiology, Vol. 261, No. 1, 01.10.2011, p. 156-164.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Keedy, AW, Yee, J, Aslam, R, Weinstein, S, Landeras, LA, Shah, JN, McQuaid, KR & Yeh, BM 2011, 'Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography: Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate', Radiology, vol. 261, no. 1, pp. 156-164. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11110217
Keedy, Alexander W. ; Yee, Judy ; Aslam, Rizwan ; Weinstein, Stefanie ; Landeras, Luis A. ; Shah, Janak N. ; McQuaid, Kenneth R. ; Yeh, Benjamin M. / Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography : Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate. In: Radiology. 2011 ; Vol. 261, No. 1. pp. 156-164.
@article{5b89191fb3654191bd71945b4fb7bfd7,
title = "Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography: Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate",
abstract = "Purpose: To prospectively compare adequacy of colonic cleansing, adequacy of solid stool and fluid tagging, and patient acceptance by using reduced-volume, 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) versus magnesium citrate bowel preparations for CT colonography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional Committee on Human Research and was compliant with HIPAA; all patients provided written consent. In this randomized, investigatorblinded study, 50 patients underwent oral preparation with either a 2-L PEG or a magnesium citrate solution, tagging with oral contrast agents, and subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy. The residual stool (score 0 [best] to 3 [worst]) and fluid (score 0 [best] to 4 [worst]) burden and tagging adequacy were qualitatively assessed. Residual fluid attenuation was recorded as a quantitative measure of tagging adequacy. Patients completed a tolerance questionnaire within 2 weeks of scanning. Preparations were compared for residual stool and fluid by using generalized estimating equations; the Mann- Whitney test was used to compare the qualitative tagging score, mean residual fluid attenuation, and adverse effects assessed on the patient experience questionnaire. Results: The mean residual stool (0.90 of three) and fluid burden (1.05 of four) scores for PEG were similar to those for magnesium citrate (0.96 [ P =.58] and 0.98 [ P =.48], respectively). However, the mean fecal and fluid tagging scores were significantly better for PEG (0.48 and 0.28, respectively) than for magnesium citrate (1.52 [ P < .01] and 1.28 [ P < .01], respectively). Mean residual fluid attenuation was higher for PEG (765 HU) than for magnesium citrate (443 HU, P =.01), and mean interpretation time was shorter for PEG (14.8 minutes) than for magnesium citrate (18.0 minutes, P =.04). Tolerance ratings were not significantly different between preparations. Conclusion: Reduced-volume PEG and magnesium citrate bowel preparations demonstrated adequate cleansing effectiveness for CT colonography, with better tagging and shorter interpretation time observed in the PEG group. Adequate polyp detection was maintained but requires further validation because of the small number of clinically important polyps.",
author = "Keedy, {Alexander W.} and Judy Yee and Rizwan Aslam and Stefanie Weinstein and Landeras, {Luis A.} and Shah, {Janak N.} and McQuaid, {Kenneth R.} and Yeh, {Benjamin M.}",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiol.11110217",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "261",
pages = "156--164",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reduced cathartic bowel preparation for CT colonography

T2 - Prospective comparison of 2-L polyethylene glycol and magnesium citrate

AU - Keedy, Alexander W.

AU - Yee, Judy

AU - Aslam, Rizwan

AU - Weinstein, Stefanie

AU - Landeras, Luis A.

AU - Shah, Janak N.

AU - McQuaid, Kenneth R.

AU - Yeh, Benjamin M.

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To prospectively compare adequacy of colonic cleansing, adequacy of solid stool and fluid tagging, and patient acceptance by using reduced-volume, 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) versus magnesium citrate bowel preparations for CT colonography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional Committee on Human Research and was compliant with HIPAA; all patients provided written consent. In this randomized, investigatorblinded study, 50 patients underwent oral preparation with either a 2-L PEG or a magnesium citrate solution, tagging with oral contrast agents, and subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy. The residual stool (score 0 [best] to 3 [worst]) and fluid (score 0 [best] to 4 [worst]) burden and tagging adequacy were qualitatively assessed. Residual fluid attenuation was recorded as a quantitative measure of tagging adequacy. Patients completed a tolerance questionnaire within 2 weeks of scanning. Preparations were compared for residual stool and fluid by using generalized estimating equations; the Mann- Whitney test was used to compare the qualitative tagging score, mean residual fluid attenuation, and adverse effects assessed on the patient experience questionnaire. Results: The mean residual stool (0.90 of three) and fluid burden (1.05 of four) scores for PEG were similar to those for magnesium citrate (0.96 [ P =.58] and 0.98 [ P =.48], respectively). However, the mean fecal and fluid tagging scores were significantly better for PEG (0.48 and 0.28, respectively) than for magnesium citrate (1.52 [ P < .01] and 1.28 [ P < .01], respectively). Mean residual fluid attenuation was higher for PEG (765 HU) than for magnesium citrate (443 HU, P =.01), and mean interpretation time was shorter for PEG (14.8 minutes) than for magnesium citrate (18.0 minutes, P =.04). Tolerance ratings were not significantly different between preparations. Conclusion: Reduced-volume PEG and magnesium citrate bowel preparations demonstrated adequate cleansing effectiveness for CT colonography, with better tagging and shorter interpretation time observed in the PEG group. Adequate polyp detection was maintained but requires further validation because of the small number of clinically important polyps.

AB - Purpose: To prospectively compare adequacy of colonic cleansing, adequacy of solid stool and fluid tagging, and patient acceptance by using reduced-volume, 2-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) versus magnesium citrate bowel preparations for CT colonography. Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the institutional Committee on Human Research and was compliant with HIPAA; all patients provided written consent. In this randomized, investigatorblinded study, 50 patients underwent oral preparation with either a 2-L PEG or a magnesium citrate solution, tagging with oral contrast agents, and subsequent CT colonography and segmentally unblinded colonoscopy. The residual stool (score 0 [best] to 3 [worst]) and fluid (score 0 [best] to 4 [worst]) burden and tagging adequacy were qualitatively assessed. Residual fluid attenuation was recorded as a quantitative measure of tagging adequacy. Patients completed a tolerance questionnaire within 2 weeks of scanning. Preparations were compared for residual stool and fluid by using generalized estimating equations; the Mann- Whitney test was used to compare the qualitative tagging score, mean residual fluid attenuation, and adverse effects assessed on the patient experience questionnaire. Results: The mean residual stool (0.90 of three) and fluid burden (1.05 of four) scores for PEG were similar to those for magnesium citrate (0.96 [ P =.58] and 0.98 [ P =.48], respectively). However, the mean fecal and fluid tagging scores were significantly better for PEG (0.48 and 0.28, respectively) than for magnesium citrate (1.52 [ P < .01] and 1.28 [ P < .01], respectively). Mean residual fluid attenuation was higher for PEG (765 HU) than for magnesium citrate (443 HU, P =.01), and mean interpretation time was shorter for PEG (14.8 minutes) than for magnesium citrate (18.0 minutes, P =.04). Tolerance ratings were not significantly different between preparations. Conclusion: Reduced-volume PEG and magnesium citrate bowel preparations demonstrated adequate cleansing effectiveness for CT colonography, with better tagging and shorter interpretation time observed in the PEG group. Adequate polyp detection was maintained but requires further validation because of the small number of clinically important polyps.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053079260&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053079260&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.11110217

DO - 10.1148/radiol.11110217

M3 - Article

VL - 261

SP - 156

EP - 164

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -