两种肠道准备方式在结肠镜检查中的应用对比  

Comparison of two bowel preparation methods in colonoscopy

作　　者：吴伟聪[1] 梁志伟[1] 朱柏桂 张梅[1] 

机构地区：[1]四会市人民医院,广东四会526200

出　　处：《包头医学院学报》2018年第2期75-76,共2页Journal of Baotou Medical College

摘　　要：目的:探讨两种肠道准备方式在结肠镜检查中的应用效果。方法:选取172例需要进行结肠镜检查的患者随机分为采用聚乙二醇电解质散清肠的观察组86例与采用甘露醇清肠的对照组86例,对比两种方法的治疗效果。结果:观察组患者的整体肠道清洁优良率为70.9%(61/86),高于对照组的60.5%(52/86)(χ2=3.882,P=0.047);观察组的平均排便次数少于对照组(t=2.192,P<0.05);观察组患者的不良反应发生率为3.5%(3/86),与对照组的7.0%(6/86)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:结肠镜检查中聚乙二醇电解质散的清肠效果优于甘露醇,且所引发的不良反应发生率不高,清肠过程安全性更高。Objective：To evaluate the effect of two different bowel preparation methods in colonoscopy. Methods： 172 patients admitted for colonoscopy were selected and randomly divided into the observation group with polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder in bowel cleaning （ n = 86 ） and the control group with mannitol in bowel cleaning （ n = 86）. The therapeutic effects of the two methods were compared. Results： The excellent rate of overall bowel cleaning in the observation group was 70.9 % （61/86） higher than that in the control group 60.5 % （52/86） （ X2 = 3. 882, P 〈 0.05 ）. The average defecation times of the observation group were less than those of the control group （ t = 2. 192, P 〈 0.05 ）. The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was 3.5 % （3/86） , which was lower than that of the control group （7.0 % ） （6/86） （ X2 = 2. 543, P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion： In colonoscopy, the bowel cleaning effect of polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder is better than that of mannitol. The adverse reaction rate is low, and the process of bowel cleaning is of higher security.

关 键 词：聚乙二醇电解质散 甘露醇 结肠镜检查 

分 类 号：R574.62[医药卫生—消化系统]