Brief Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 16, 2013; 5(4): 165-168
Published online Apr 16, 2013. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i4.165
Polyethylene glycol 3350 based colon cleaning protocol: 2 d vs 4 d head to head comparison
Rotem Elitsur, Lisa Butcher, Lund Vicki, Yoram Elitsur
Rotem Elitsur, Lisa Butcher, Lund Vicki, Yoram Elitsur, Department of Pediatrics, Section of Gastroenterology, Marshall University School of Medicine, Huntington, WV 25701, United States
Author contributions: Elitsur R, Butcher L, Vicki L and Elitsur Y contributed equally to the paper.
Correspondence to: Yoram Elitsur, MD, Professor in Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, Section of Gastroenterology, Marshall University School of Medicine, 1600 Medical Center Drive, Huntington, WV 25701, United States. elitsur@marshall.edu
Telephone: +1-304-6911300 Fax: +1-304-6911375
Received: October 9, 2012
Revised: October 26, 2012
Accepted: January 5, 2013
Published online: April 16, 2013
Processing time: 189 Days and 17.7 Hours
Abstract

AIM: To compare between 2 and 4 d colon cleansing protocols.

METHODS: Children who were scheduled for colonoscopy procedure (2010-2012) for various medical reasons, were recruited from the pediatric gastroenterology clinic at Marshall University School of Medicine, Huntington, WV. Exclusion criteria were patients who were allergic to the medication used in the protocols [polyethylene glycol (PEG) 3350, Bisacodyl], or children with metabolic or renal diseases. Two PEG 3350 protocols for 4 d (A) and 2 d (B) were prescribed as previously described. A questionnaire describing the volume of PEG consumed, clinical data, and side effects were recorded. Colon preparation was graded by two observers according to previously described method. Main outcome measurements: Rate of adequate colon preparation.

RESULTS: A total of 78 patients were considered for final calculation (group A: 40, group B: 38). Age and stool consistency at the last day was comparable in both groups, but the number of stools/day was significantly higher in group B (P = 0.001). Adequate colon preparation was reached in 57.5% (A) and 73.6% (B), respectively (P = 0.206). Side effects were minimal and comparable in both groups. There was no difference in children’s age, stool characteristics, or side effects between the children with adequate or inadequate colon preparation. Correlation and agreement between observers was excellent (Pearson correlation = 0.972, kappa = 1.0).

CONCLUSION: No difference between protocols was observed, but the 2 d protocol was superior for its shorter time. Direct comparison between different colon cleansing protocols is crucial in order to establish the “gold standard” protocol for children.

Keywords: Colonoscopy; Polyethylene glycol 3350; Cleansing protocol; Children