Sodium picosulphate or polyethylene glycol before elective colonoscopy in outpatients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_ROCHA_Sodium_picosulphate_or_polyethylene_glycol_before_elective_colonoscopy_2018.PDF (2.68 MB)
Citações na Scopus
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2018
DOI
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
Autores
Citação
WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, v.10, n.12, p.422-441, 2018
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
AIM To determine the best option for bowel preparation [sodium picosulphate or polyethylene glycol (PEG)] for elective colonoscopy in adult outpatients. METHODS A systematic review of the literature following the PRISMA guidelines was performed using Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, Central, Cinahl and Lilacs. No restrictions were placed for country, year of publication or language. The last search in the literature was performed on November 20th, 2017. Only randomized clinical trials with full texts published were included. The subjects included were adult outpatients who underwent bowel cleansing for elective colonoscopy. The included studies compared sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) and PEG for bowel preparation. Exclusion criteria were the inclusion of inpatients or groups with specific conditions, failure to mention patient status (outpatient or inpatient) or dietary restrictions, and permission to have unrestricted diet on the day prior to the exam. Primary outcomes were bowel cleaning success and/or tolerability of colon preparation. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, polyp and adenoma detection rates. Data on intention-totreat were extracted by two independent authors and risk of bias assessed through the Jadad scale. Funnel plots, Egger's test, Higgins' test (I2) and sensitivity analyses were used to assess reporting bias and heterogeneity. The meta-analysis was performed by computing risk difference (RD) using Mantel-Haenszel (MH) method with fixed-effects (FE) and random-effects (RE) models. Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5) version 6.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration) was the software chosen to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS 662 records were identified but only 16 trials with 6200 subjects were included for the meta-analysis. High heterogeneity among studies was found and sensitivity analysis was needed and performed to interpret data. In the pooled analysis, SPMC was better for bowel cleaning [MH FE, RD 0.03, IC (0.01, 0.05), P = 0.003, I-2 = 33%, NNT 34], for tolerability [MH RE, RD 0.08, IC (0.03, 0.13), P = 0.002, I-2 = 88%, NNT 13] and for adverse events [MH RE, RD 0.13, IC (0.05, 0.22), P = 0.002, I-2 = 88%, NNT 7]. There was no difference in regard to polyp and adenoma detection rates. Additional analyses were made by subgroups (type of regimen, volume of PEG solution and dietary recommendations). SPMC demonstrated better tolerability levels when compared to PEG in the following subgroups: ""day-before preparation"" [MH FE, RD 0.17, IC (0.13, 0.21), P < 0.0001, I-2 = 0%, NNT 6], "" preparation in accordance with time interval for colonoscopy"" [MH RE, RD 0.08, IC (0.01, 0.15), P = 0.02, I-2 = 54%, NNT 13], when compared to ""high-volume PEG solutions"" [MH RE, RD 0.08, IC (0.01, 0.14), I-2 = 89%, P = 0.02, NNT 13] and in the subgroup "" liquid diet on day before"" [MH RE, RD 0.14, IC (0.06,0.22), P = 0.0006, I-2 = 81%, NNT 8]. SPMC was also found to cause fewer adverse events than PEG in the "" high-volume PEG solutions"" [MH RE, RD -0.18, IC (-0.30, -0.07), P = 0.002, I-2 = 79%, NNT 6] and PEG in the "" low-residue diet"" subgroup [MH RE, RD -0.17, IC (-0.27, 0.07), P = 0.0008, I-2 = 86%, NNT 6]. CONCLUSION SPMC seems to be better than PEG for bowel preparation, with a similar bowel cleaning success rate, better tolerability and lower prevalence of adverse events.
Palavras-chave
Sodium picosulphate, Polyethylene glycol, Bowel cleaning success, Tolerability, Colonoscopy, Randomized clinical trials, Meta-analysis
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/30948
Referências
  1. Anastassopoulos K, 2016, DIGEST DIS SCI, V61, P2993, DOI 10.1007/s10620-016-4214-2
  2. Atkins D, 2004, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V328, P1490
  3. Bechtold ML, 2016, ANN GASTROENTEROL, V29, P137, DOI 10.20524/aog.2016.0005
  4. Belsey J, 2012, ALIMENT PHARM THER, V35, P222, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04927.x
  5. Bucci C, 2014, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V80, P566, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.320
  6. Choi HS, 2016, J DIGEST DIS, V17, P268, DOI 10.1111/1751-2980.12337
  7. Copas J, 2000, Biostatistics, V1, P247, DOI 10.1093/biostatistics/1.3.247
  8. Coronel M, 2017, J GASTROENTEROL PANC, P1
  9. de Moura Diogo Turiani, 2016, Rev Gastroenterol Peru, V36, P293
  10. Dik VK, 2015, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V81, P665, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.066
  11. Egger M, 1997, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V315, P629, DOI 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
  12. Froehlich F, 2005, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V61, P378, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02776-2
  13. Gweon TG, 2015, MEDICINE, V94, DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000000628
  14. Harewood GC, 2003, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V58, P76, DOI 10.1067/mge.2003.294
  15. Hassan C, 2013, ENDOSCOPY, V45, P142, DOI 10.1055/s-0032-1326186
  16. Heetun Z, 2016, IRISH J MED SCI, V185, P629, DOI 10.1007/s11845-015-1320-7
  17. Higgins JPT, 2003, BRIT MED J, V327, P557, DOI 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  18. Hoy SM, 2009, DRUGS, V69, P123, DOI 10.2165/00003495-200969010-00009
  19. Iberati A, 2009, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V339, pb2700, DOI 10.1136/BMJ.B2700
  20. Jadad AR, 1996, CONTROL CLIN TRIALS, V17, P1, DOI 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
  21. Jeon SR, 2015, INT J COLORECTAL DIS, V30, P251, DOI 10.1007/s00384-014-2066-9
  22. Jin Z, 2016, EUR J CLIN PHARMACOL, V72, P523, DOI 10.1007/s00228-016-2013-5
  23. Johnson DA, 2014, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V147, P903, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002
  24. Kang MS, 2014, INTEST RES, V12, P53, DOI 10.5217/ir.2014.12.1.53
  25. Kao D, 2011, CAN J GASTROENTEROL, V25, P657, DOI 10.1155/2011/486084
  26. Katz PO, 2013, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V108, P401, DOI 10.1038/ajg.2012.441
  27. Kim ES, 2014, SCAND J GASTROENTERO, V49, P871, DOI 10.3109/00365521.2014.910543
  28. Kim HG, 2015, GUT LIVER, V9, P494, DOI 10.5009/gnl14010
  29. Kim YS, 2014, DIS COLON RECTUM, V57, P522, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000066
  30. Kojecky V, 2012, GASTROENT HEPATOL, V66, P470
  31. Kojecky V, 2018, DIGEST LIVER DIS, V50, P271, DOI 10.1016/j.dld.2017.10.010
  32. Kojecky V, 2014, J GASTROINTEST LIVER, V23, P141
  33. Lawrance IC, 2011, ENDOSCOPY, V43, P412, DOI 10.1055/s-0030-1256193
  34. Lebwohl B, 2011, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V73, P1207, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.051
  35. Leitao K, 2014, ENDOSC INT OPEN, V2, pE230, DOI 10.1055/s-0034-1377520
  36. Lim YJ, 2014, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V20, P2741, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v20.i11.2741
  37. Manes G, 2013, COLORECTAL DIS, V15, P1145, DOI 10.1111/codi.12246
  38. Martel M, 2015, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V149, P79, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.004
  39. Munoz-Navas M, 2015, INT J COLORECTAL DIS, V30, P1407, DOI 10.1007/s00384-015-2307-6
  40. Munsterman ID, 2015, EUR J GASTROEN HEPAT, V27, P29, DOI 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000192
  41. Navarro M, 2017, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V23, P3632, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v23.i20.3632
  42. Parra-Blanco A, 2014, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V20, P17709, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v20.i47.17709
  43. Pohl J, 2015, PLOS ONE, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0126067
  44. Regev A, 1998, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V93, P1478, DOI 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00467.x
  45. Regev A, 1996, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V43, P118
  46. Rex DK, 2002, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V97, P1696
  47. Rex DK, 2017, BEST PRACT RES CL GA, V31, P425, DOI 10.1016/j.bpg.2017.05.010
  48. Rex DK, 2014, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V80, P1113, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329
  49. Rex DK, 2013, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V78, P132, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2013.02.024
  50. Ribeiro IB, 2018, ENDOSC INT OPEN, V6, pE558, DOI 10.1055/a-0591-2883
  51. Ruiz Zavala AM, 2016, ENDOSCOPIA, V28, P148
  52. Tan JJY, 2006, COLORECTAL DIS, V8, P247, DOI 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.00970.x
  53. THOMAS G, 1982, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V82, P435
  54. van Lieshout I, 2017, UNITED EUR GASTROENT, V5, P917, DOI 10.1177/2050640616684696
  55. Voiosu T, 2013, J GASTROINTEST LIVER, V22, P129
  56. Worthington J, 2008, CURR MED RES OPIN, V24, P481, DOI [10.1185/030079908X260844, 10.1185/030079908X260844 ]
  57. Xie QS, 2014, PLOS ONE, V9, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0099092
  58. Yoo IK, 2015, DIGEST LIVER DIS, V47, P131, DOI 10.1016/j.dld.2014.10.019

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICESP
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/InCor
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/35