PURPOSE: The aim of our prospective study was to compare patient tolerance of laxative free fecal tagging regimen (LFT) versus traditional cathartic cleansing (TC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 264 patients, at average risk for development of colorectal cancer (105 men and 159 women; mean age 62 years ± 5 SD), underwent 32 rows CT colonography. Patients were alternatively placed into 2 study groups: Group 1 (n = 132) followed TC and Group 2 (n = 132) LFT. TC protocol consisted of no fiber diet and Phospho-lax(®) 80 mL in 2 L of water the day before imaging. LFT protocol consisted of no fiber diet and ingestion with meals of 30 mL of water-soluble iodinated contrast agent (Gastrografin(®)) for 2 days before imaging. No frank laxative drugs were administered. All studies were reviewed in a combined fashion, primary 2D followed by 3D endoluminal and dissected views. After the examination all patients were asked to provide a feedback about tolerance to the each bowel preparation. The first 30 patients of each group were also investigated with optical colonoscopy (OC) used as gold standard to confirm our diagnosis (Group 1* and Group 2*). CONCLUSIONS: LFT reduces discomfort and seems to improve diagnostic accuracy of CTC.
CT colonography: patient tolerance of laxative free fecal tagging regimen versus traditional cathartic cleansing
NERI, EMANUELE;BARTOLOZZI, CARLO;
2011-01-01
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of our prospective study was to compare patient tolerance of laxative free fecal tagging regimen (LFT) versus traditional cathartic cleansing (TC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 264 patients, at average risk for development of colorectal cancer (105 men and 159 women; mean age 62 years ± 5 SD), underwent 32 rows CT colonography. Patients were alternatively placed into 2 study groups: Group 1 (n = 132) followed TC and Group 2 (n = 132) LFT. TC protocol consisted of no fiber diet and Phospho-lax(®) 80 mL in 2 L of water the day before imaging. LFT protocol consisted of no fiber diet and ingestion with meals of 30 mL of water-soluble iodinated contrast agent (Gastrografin(®)) for 2 days before imaging. No frank laxative drugs were administered. All studies were reviewed in a combined fashion, primary 2D followed by 3D endoluminal and dissected views. After the examination all patients were asked to provide a feedback about tolerance to the each bowel preparation. The first 30 patients of each group were also investigated with optical colonoscopy (OC) used as gold standard to confirm our diagnosis (Group 1* and Group 2*). CONCLUSIONS: LFT reduces discomfort and seems to improve diagnostic accuracy of CTC.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
