The Effects of Combined Use of Linaclotide and Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder in Colonoscopy Preparation for Patients With Chronic Constipation.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of linaclotide and polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolyte powder in patients with chronic constipation undergoing colonoscopy preparation. We included 260 patients with chronic constipation who were scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy. They were equally divided into 4 groups using a random number table: 4L PEG, 3L PEG, 3L PEG+L, and 2L PEG+L. The 4 groups were compared based on their scores on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPQS), adverse reactions during the bowel preparation procedure, colonoscope insertion time, colonoscope withdrawal time, detection rate of adenomas, and their willingness to repeat bowel preparation. In terms of the score of the right half of the colon, the score of the transverse colon, the total score using BBPS, and the total score using OBPQS, the 3L PEG (polyethylene glycol)+L group was superior to groups 3L PEG and 2L PEG+L (P<0.05), but comparable to the 4L PEG group (P>0.05). The incidence rate of vomiting was higher in the 4L PEG group than in the 2L PEG+L group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the insertion time of the colonoscope between the 4 groups. The colonoscope withdrawal time in the 3L PEG+L group was shorter than in groups 4L PEG and 3L PEG (P<0.05) and comparable to that in the 4L PEG group (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of adenoma detection among the 4 groups (P>0.05). The 4L PEG group was the least willing of the 4 groups to undergo repeated bowel preparation (P<0.05). The 3L PEG+L is optimal among the 4 procedures. It can facilitate high-quality bowel preparation, reduce the incidence of nausea during the bowel preparation procedure, and encourage patients to undertake repeated bowel preparation.