COLONIC INVESTIGATIONS IN THE ELDERLY - COLONOSCOPY OR BARIUM ENEMA

被引:26
作者
BURTIN, P
BOUR, B
CHARLOIS, T
RUGET, O
CALES, P
DAUVER, A
BOYER, J
机构
[1] Gastroenterology Unit, University Hospital, Angers
[2] Gastroenterology Unit, General Hospital, Le Mans
[3] Gastroenterology Unit, General Hospital, Luçon
[4] Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Angers
来源
AGING-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH | 1995年 / 7卷 / 04期
关键词
BARIUM ENEMA; COLONOSCOPY; ELDERLY; RANDOMIZED STUDY;
D O I
10.1007/BF03324334
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
Colonoscopy (CS) is currently considered the best diagnostic procedure for colonic imaging. The objectives of this multicentric study were to assess whether CS or simple contrast barium enema (SCBE) has the best effectiveness and tolerance in the elderly (over 80 years old). Except in cases of emergency, 67 elderly patients from 3 centers were randomized among three diagnostic strategies: CS, SCBE or barium enema + rectosigmoidoscopy (BERS). CSs were generally carried out after polyethylene-glyco( (PEG) cleansing, and barium enemas after enema cleansing. The diagnostic effectiveness of the three strategies was nor significantly different: a colonic abnormality was found in CS, SCBE, BERS groups in 65, 56 and 71% of the cases, respectively. No other investigation was needed in 61 to 76% of cases, and, on the basis of the exploration, final therapy was modified in less than 22% of cases. Overall cleansing quality was significantly better with barium enema (84.1%) than with CS (57.0%; p<0.05). This was explained by a poor tolerance to PEG intake, which led to 28.2% of adverse effects, compared with 7.1% after enema preparation (p<0.05). This resulted in a significantly higher failure rate of complete colonic exploration with CS (48%) than with barium enema (9%; p<0.001). In conclusion, the effectiveness of the three diagnostic strategies is similar in the elderly. However, due to a better acceptance of the enema preparation, and to a better success rate of complete exploration, SCBE should be preferred to investigate colonic symptoms when the above preparations are used.
引用
收藏
页码:190 / 194
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
Willia C.B., Macrae F.A., Bartram C.I., A prospective study of diagnostic methods in adenoma follow-up, Endoscopy, 14, pp. 74-78, (1982)
[2]  
Howard O.M., Buchanan J.D., Hunt R.H., Angiodysplasia of the colon. Experience of 26 cases, Lancet, 2, pp. 16-19, (1982)
[3]  
Hochter W., Weingart J., Kuhner W., Frimberger E., Ottenjann R., Angiodysplasia in the colon and rectum. Endoscopic morphology, localisation and frequency, Endoscopy, 17, pp. 182-185, (1985)
[4]  
O'Brien M.J., Winawer S.J., Zauber A.G., Gottlieb L., Sternberg S., Diaz B., Dickersin G., Ewing S., Geller S., Kasimian D., Komorowski R., Saporn A., The National Polyp Study Group: Patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas, Gastroenterology, 98, pp. 371-379, (1990)
[5]  
Brunetaud J.M., Mosquet L., Houcke M., Scopelliti J., Rance F., Cortot A., Paris J.C., Villous adenomas of the rectum. Results of endoscopic treatment with Argon and Nd:YAG lasers, Gastroenterology, 89, pp. 832-837, (1985)
[6]  
Rex D.K., Weddle R.A., Lehman G.A., Pound D., O'Connor K., Hawes R., Dittus R., Lappas J., Lumeng L., Flexible sigmoidoscopy plus air contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy for suspected lower gastrointestinal bleeding, Gastroenterology, 98, pp. 855-861, (1990)
[7]  
Parks T.G., Natural history of diverticular disease of the colon, Clin. Gastroenterol., 4, pp. 53-69, (1975)
[8]  
Personnes âgées: environnement, santé, revenus. Cahiers statistiques, Solidarité santé, (1989)
[9]  
Jaramillo E., Slezak P., Comparison between double-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy to investigate lower gastrointestinal bleeding, Gastrointest. Radiol., 17, pp. 81-83, (1992)
[10]  
Norfleet R.G., Ryan M.E., Wyman J.B., Rhodes R., Nunez J., Kirchner J., Parent K., Barium enema versus colonoscopy for patients with polyps found during flexible sigmoidoscopy, Gastrointest. Endosc., 35, pp. 531-534, (1991)