论文部分内容阅读
目的观察以复方聚乙二醇电解质散及硫酸镁为主要清肠剂的肠道准备在胶囊内镜检查中的效果及不良反应。方法将2010年1月至2012年12月在北大医疗鲁中医院行胶囊内镜检查的患者270例随机分为A组90例(硫酸镁组)、B组90例(复方聚乙二醇电解质散组)、C组90例(复方聚乙二醇电解质散+二甲硅油组)。对比观察3种准备方法在胶囊内镜检查中的肠道清洁度、肠道中的气泡量、在肠道准备过程中的不良反应以及小肠转运时间。结果 C组在肠道清洁度效果上均明显优于A、B组;A组患者应用泻药后有头晕、恶心、呕吐症状,部分病人耐受差,B、C组患者上述症状明显减少,耐受程度优于A组(P<0.05);C组小肠转运时间最短,优于A、B组。结论综合对比结果,复方聚乙二醇电解质联合二甲硅油散应用是最为理想的胶囊内镜检查前的准备方法。
Objective To observe the effects and adverse reactions of gut preparation in capsule endoscopy with compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder and magnesium sulfate as main bowel agents. Methods From January 2010 to December 2012, 270 patients undergoing capsule endoscopy at Peking University Medical Lu Chinese Medicine Hospital were randomly divided into 90 patients in group A (magnesium sulfate group) and 90 patients in group B (compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte Scattered group), C group of 90 patients (compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte + simethicone group). The comparisons of intestinal cleanliness, volume of air bubbles in the intestine, adverse reactions during bowel preparation, and transit time of small intestine in the three endoscopic preparations were observed. Results The intestinal cleanliness of group C was significantly better than that of group A and B. The symptoms of dizziness, nausea and vomiting were worse in group A than those in group A, and some patients were poorly tolerated. The symptoms of group B and C were significantly reduced (P <0.05). The transit time of small intestine in group C was the lowest, which was better than group A and group B. Conclusion The results of the comprehensive comparison, the compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte with simethicone powder is the most ideal preparation for capsule endoscopy.