摘要
目的:探讨聚乙二醇电解质散剂(PEG)中加入低剂量硫酸镁和西甲硅油在结肠镜检查前肠道准备中的应用和观察。方法:150例行结肠镜检查的患者,按不同肠道准备方法随机分为三组:A组:PEG;B组:PEG+低剂量硫酸镁;C组:PEG+低剂量硫酸镁+西甲硅油,每组50例。比较不同方法的有效性、安全性及耐受性。结果:所有患者均完成肠道准备和全结肠镜检查。肠道清洁度比较,C组、B组均优于A组,差异有统计学意义(96%vs 92%vs 72%,χ~2=6.78,χ~2=10.71,均P<0.05)。肠道内气泡产生率比较,C组优于B组和A组,差异有统计学意义(χ~2=6.35,χ~2=4.33,均P<0.05)。三种肠道准备方法的不良反应、药物耐受情况差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:聚乙二醇电解质散剂联合低剂量硫酸镁和西甲硅油用于结肠镜检查前的肠道准备,有效性较高,安全性和耐受性值得进一步探讨。
Objective： To study the effect of polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder with a low dose of magnesium sulfate and simethicone in bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Methods： 150 patients chosen for colonoscopy,according to different bowel preparation were randomly divided into three groups： group A： PEG,group B： low dose of magnesium sulfate ＋ PEG,group C： simethicone plus low dose of magnesium sulfate ＋ PEG,to compare the efficacy,safety and tolerability. Results： All patients completed a full bowel preparation and colonoscopy. Intestinal cleanliness in group B,group C compared to group A were statistically significant（ P〈0. 05）,while group B and group C were no significant difference（ P〉0. 05）. The intestine bubble generation rate in group C,compared to group A,group B,respectively,the difference was statistically significant（ P〈0. 05）,while the difference was not statistically significant（ P〉0. 05）between group A and group B. Adverse reactions,drug tolerance were no significantly different（ P〉0. 05） in the three bowel preparation methods. Conclusion：The polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder with low doses of magnesium sulfate and simethicone in bowel preparation for colonoscopy has higher effectiveness,the safety and tolerability need to be further explored.
出处
《现代肿瘤医学》
CAS
2017年第4期587-590,共4页
Journal of Modern Oncology
基金
福建省科技厅军民共建(社发)引导性项目(编号:2015Y5005)
关键词
聚乙二醇电解质散剂
硫酸镁
西甲硅油
肠镜检查
肠道准备
polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder
magnesium sulfate
simethicone
colonoscopy
bowel preparation
