结肠镜术前肠道准备三种方案清洁效果的对比研究

目的 比较临床上常用的3种肠道准备方案的肠道清洁效果，寻求最快速有效的肠道准备方案。方法 对2017年5月至6月在江苏省人民医院消化科病房拟行肠镜检查的患者77例行不同方案的肠道准备，并按不同方案分为3组。第1组22例口服聚乙二醇电解质散2 L+乳果糖口服液6包单次服用；第2组31例口服聚乙二醇电解质散2 L+乳果糖口服液6包分次服用；第3组24例口服聚乙二醇电解质散3 L。观察患者服药后肠道准备的效果和不良反应情况。结果 肉眼观察肠道清洁有效的例数，第2组明显多于其他两组（P＜0.05）；肠镜下渥太华量表评分显示，第1组和第2组对比差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），第2组和第3组对比，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），说明渥太华评分标准判断下，第2组优于第3组；服药不良反应率比较，第2组明显优于其他两组（P＜0.05）。结论 采用聚乙二醇电解质散2 L+乳果糖口服液6包分次服用方案进行肠道准备，具有较好的肠道清洁效果，不良反应少，患者更易接受。

Comparison of three kinds of cleaning for the bowel preparation before colonoscopy

Objective To explore an effective bowel preparation program by comparing three kinds of bowel preparation which are commonly used in clinical practice. Methods Seventy-seven patients needing colonoscopy treatment were divided randomly into group 1 (22 cases), group 2 (31 cases) and group 3 (24 cases). The patients in group 1 were given 2L polyethylene electrolyte power and 6 packets of whole-dose lactulose oral solution. The patients in group 2 were given 2L polyethylene electrolyte power and 6 packets of split-dose lactulose oral solution. The patients in group 3 were given 3L polyethylene electrolyte power only. The effects of bowel preparation and adverse reactions were evaluated. Results For the cleaning effects for intestinal tracts by sight, the method implemented in group 2 was better than others. According to the Ottawa scoring standard, there were no significant difference between group 1 and group 2 (P>0.05). The difference between the group 2 and the group 3 was statistically significant (P<0.05) , which meant that the group 2 was better than the group 3. As for the adverse drug reaction rates, the rate of group 2 was significantly lower than that in the other two groups (P <0.05). Conclusion The bowel preparation program performed in group 2 has a good intestinal cleaning effect with less adverse reactions, which is more acceptable by patients.