Cargando…
Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study
This study tested the hypothesis that bowel preparation with mannitol should not affect the colonic concentration of H(2) and CH(4). Therefore, the SATISFACTION study, an international, multicenter, randomized, parallel‐group phase II–III study investigated this issue. The phase II dose‐finding part...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10176010/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36799346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13486 |
_version_ | 1785040342720970752 |
---|---|
author | Carnovali, Marino Spada, Cristiano Uebel, Peter Bocus, Paolo Cannizzaro, Renato Cavallaro, Flaminia Cesana, Bruno Mario Cesaro, Paola Costamagna, Guido Di Paolo, Dhanai Ferrari, Angelo Paulo Hinkel, Carsten Kashin, Sergey Massella, Arianna Melnikova, Ekaterina Orsatti, Anna Ponchon, Thierry Prada, Alberto Radaelli, Franco Sferrazza, Sandro Soru, Pietro Testoni, Pier Alberto Tontini, Gian Eugenio Vecchi, Maurizio Fiori, Giancarla |
author_facet | Carnovali, Marino Spada, Cristiano Uebel, Peter Bocus, Paolo Cannizzaro, Renato Cavallaro, Flaminia Cesana, Bruno Mario Cesaro, Paola Costamagna, Guido Di Paolo, Dhanai Ferrari, Angelo Paulo Hinkel, Carsten Kashin, Sergey Massella, Arianna Melnikova, Ekaterina Orsatti, Anna Ponchon, Thierry Prada, Alberto Radaelli, Franco Sferrazza, Sandro Soru, Pietro Testoni, Pier Alberto Tontini, Gian Eugenio Vecchi, Maurizio Fiori, Giancarla |
author_sort | Carnovali, Marino |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study tested the hypothesis that bowel preparation with mannitol should not affect the colonic concentration of H(2) and CH(4). Therefore, the SATISFACTION study, an international, multicenter, randomized, parallel‐group phase II–III study investigated this issue. The phase II dose‐finding part of the study evaluated H(2), CH(4), and O(2) concentrations in 179 patients randomized to treatment with 50 g, 100 g, or 150 g mannitol. Phase III of the study compared the presence of intestinal gases in 680 patients randomized (1:1) to receive mannitol 100 g in single dose or a standard split‐dose 2 L polyethylene glycol (PEG)‐Asc preparation (2 L PEG‐Asc). Phase II results showed that mannitol did not influence the concentration of intestinal gases. During phase III, no patient in either group had H(2) or CH(4) concentrations above the critical thresholds. In patients with H(2) and/or CH(4) levels above detectable concentrations, the mean values were below the risk thresholds by at least one order of magnitude. The results also highlighted the effectiveness of standard washing and insufflation maneuvers in removing residual intestinal gases. In conclusion, bowel cleansing with mannitol was safe as the concentrations of H(2) and CH(4) were the same as those found in patients prepared with 2 L PEG‐Asc. In both groups, the concentrations of gases were influenced more by the degree of cleansing achieved and the insufflation and washing maneuvers performed than by the preparation used for bowel cleansing. The trial protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04759885) and with EudraCT (eudract_number: 2019‐002856‐18). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10176010 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101760102023-05-13 Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study Carnovali, Marino Spada, Cristiano Uebel, Peter Bocus, Paolo Cannizzaro, Renato Cavallaro, Flaminia Cesana, Bruno Mario Cesaro, Paola Costamagna, Guido Di Paolo, Dhanai Ferrari, Angelo Paulo Hinkel, Carsten Kashin, Sergey Massella, Arianna Melnikova, Ekaterina Orsatti, Anna Ponchon, Thierry Prada, Alberto Radaelli, Franco Sferrazza, Sandro Soru, Pietro Testoni, Pier Alberto Tontini, Gian Eugenio Vecchi, Maurizio Fiori, Giancarla Clin Transl Sci Research This study tested the hypothesis that bowel preparation with mannitol should not affect the colonic concentration of H(2) and CH(4). Therefore, the SATISFACTION study, an international, multicenter, randomized, parallel‐group phase II–III study investigated this issue. The phase II dose‐finding part of the study evaluated H(2), CH(4), and O(2) concentrations in 179 patients randomized to treatment with 50 g, 100 g, or 150 g mannitol. Phase III of the study compared the presence of intestinal gases in 680 patients randomized (1:1) to receive mannitol 100 g in single dose or a standard split‐dose 2 L polyethylene glycol (PEG)‐Asc preparation (2 L PEG‐Asc). Phase II results showed that mannitol did not influence the concentration of intestinal gases. During phase III, no patient in either group had H(2) or CH(4) concentrations above the critical thresholds. In patients with H(2) and/or CH(4) levels above detectable concentrations, the mean values were below the risk thresholds by at least one order of magnitude. The results also highlighted the effectiveness of standard washing and insufflation maneuvers in removing residual intestinal gases. In conclusion, bowel cleansing with mannitol was safe as the concentrations of H(2) and CH(4) were the same as those found in patients prepared with 2 L PEG‐Asc. In both groups, the concentrations of gases were influenced more by the degree of cleansing achieved and the insufflation and washing maneuvers performed than by the preparation used for bowel cleansing. The trial protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04759885) and with EudraCT (eudract_number: 2019‐002856‐18). John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10176010/ /pubmed/36799346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13486 Text en © 2023 NTC SRL and The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Research Carnovali, Marino Spada, Cristiano Uebel, Peter Bocus, Paolo Cannizzaro, Renato Cavallaro, Flaminia Cesana, Bruno Mario Cesaro, Paola Costamagna, Guido Di Paolo, Dhanai Ferrari, Angelo Paulo Hinkel, Carsten Kashin, Sergey Massella, Arianna Melnikova, Ekaterina Orsatti, Anna Ponchon, Thierry Prada, Alberto Radaelli, Franco Sferrazza, Sandro Soru, Pietro Testoni, Pier Alberto Tontini, Gian Eugenio Vecchi, Maurizio Fiori, Giancarla Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title | Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title_full | Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title_fullStr | Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title_full_unstemmed | Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title_short | Factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: Results of the SATISFACTION study |
title_sort | factors influencing the presence of potentially explosive gases during colonoscopy: results of the satisfaction study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10176010/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36799346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13486 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT carnovalimarino factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT spadacristiano factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT uebelpeter factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT bocuspaolo factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT cannizzarorenato factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT cavallaroflaminia factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT cesanabrunomario factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT cesaropaola factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT costamagnaguido factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT dipaolodhanai factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT ferrariangelopaulo factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT hinkelcarsten factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT kashinsergey factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT massellaarianna factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT melnikovaekaterina factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT orsattianna factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT ponchonthierry factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT pradaalberto factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT radaellifranco factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT sferrazzasandro factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT sorupietro factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT testonipieralberto factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT tontinigianeugenio factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT vecchimaurizio factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT fiorigiancarla factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy AT factorsinfluencingthepresenceofpotentiallyexplosivegasesduringcolonoscopyresultsofthesatisfactionstudy |