Patient Acceptance and Effectiveness of a Balanced Lavage Solution (Golytely) Versus the Standard Preparation for Colonoscopy

Thomas, George; Brozinsky, Steven; Isenberg, Jon I.

doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(82)80390-9

Cited by 120 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Polyethylene glycol was superior to conventional methods in three studies,'-'' but was only equally effective in another study. 7 Our results reveal that both preparations are satisfactory, but polyethylene glycol offers a clear advantage for the colonoscopist, particularly in the proximal parts of the colon, and allows quicker and more complete examination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Short report: comparison of two orally administered bowel preparations for colonoscopy—polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate

Dakkak

Aziz

Bennett

1992

Aliment Pharmacol Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fifty-nine consecutive patients admitted for colonoscopy were randomized to receive polyethylene glycol or sodium picosulphate. Patients expressed their opinion in a questionnaire and the endoscopists, blinded to the preparation, assessed the cleanliness of different segments of the colon.There was no statistically significant difference in the tasteacceptability of the preparations, frequency of nausea, abdominal pain, peri-anal soreness or sleep disturbance between the two groups. Polyethylene glycol caused vomiting in 13 % of patients while this was absent in those who received sodium picosulphate (P < 0.05).The average number of stools passed was 12.4 in the polyethylene glycol and 8.6 in the sodium picosulphate groups; mean difference 3.8(95 % C.I. 0.7-6.9) with P < 0.02. The overall cleanliness of the colon was better in the polyethylene glycol group (P = 0.002) as judged by the blinded colonoscopist. There was less delay (P = 0.06) and more

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Short report: comparison of two orally administered bowel preparations for colonoscopy—polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate

Dakkak

Aziz

Bennett

1992

Aliment Pharmacol Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bowel preparation was performed using a balanced electrolyte solution, "Golitely" (Thomas et al, 1982). All patients underwent either ileocystoplasty or ileocaecocystoplasty.…”

Section: Operative Detailsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bladder Augmentation and Replacement

Robertson

Davies

Webb

et al. 1991

British Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bladder augmentation has a role in the management of patients with neuropathic bladder dysfunction and in urinary undiversion. Several reports attest to its clinical value, but there have been few detailed urodynamic studies of its effects. We have carried out a prospective review over a 4-year period of 25 patients undergoing bladder augmentation or substitution assessed by conventional and ambulatory urodynamic studies. All patients had a detubularised reservoir made of ileum in 6, and of the ileocaecal segment in the remainder. Six patients also had an artificial sphincter fitted and 2 underwent colposuspension. There was no mortality. After operation, bladder capacity increased from 122 +/- 91 ml to 659 +/- 431 ml and there were significant decreases in the pressure rise during filling and increases in bladder compliance. Hyper-reflexia was present in 74% before operation and 23% after operation. Regular phasic activity was observed in 77% of patients at the end of filling after operation, probably due to bowel activity despite detubularisation. Four patients described urge incontinence associated with this activity. After operation, one man had persistent major stress incontinence. He has since undergone insertion of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and is now completely dry. Of the remainder, 10 patients had minor, infrequent defects in continence, 9 patients with leakage when the bladder was full and 4 with occasional leakage at night. With the exception of the patient with major stress incontinence, all but one felt the operation had been worthwhile--40% reporting complete success and 52% excellent improvement. Reconstruction of the neuropathic lower urinary tract is a major surgical procedure, but the final clinical outcome is very satisfactory.

show abstract

“…Improving tolerability of bowel cleansing regimens may encourage patient compliance with recommended screening guidelines. At least in part, to this end, numerous randomized controlled trials [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] have been performed in an attempt to identify an ideal bowel regimen -an inexpensive substance that reliably and safely cleans the colonic mucosa while minimizing patient discomfort. It has been estimated that at least 5-15% of patients do not complete a bowel preparation secondary to the large volume and ⁄ or poor palatability of the preparation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomised clinical trial: MiraLAX vs. Golytely – a controlled study of efficacy and patient tolerability in bowel preparation for colonoscopy

Enestvedt

Fennerty

Eisen

2010

Aliment Pharmacol Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Patient Acceptance and Effectiveness of a Balanced Lavage Solution (Golytely) Versus the Standard Preparation for Colonoscopy

Cited by 120 publications

References 13 publications

Short report: comparison of two orally administered bowel preparations for colonoscopy—polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate

Short report: comparison of two orally administered bowel preparations for colonoscopy—polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate

Bladder Augmentation and Replacement

Randomised clinical trial: MiraLAX vs. Golytely – a controlled study of efficacy and patient tolerability in bowel preparation for colonoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About