Restrictive diets are unnecessary for colonoscopy: Non-inferiority randomized trial

Abstract

Background and study aims In colonoscopy, preparation is often regarded as the most burdensome part of the intervention. Traditionally, specific diets have been recommended, but the evidence to support this policy is insufficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the decision not to follow a restrictive diet on bowel preparation and colonoscopy outcomes.

Patients and methods This was a multicenter, controlled, non-inferiority randomized trial with FIT-positive screening colonoscopy. The subjects were assigned to follow the current standard (1-day low residue diet [LRD]) or a liberal diet. The allocation was balanced for the risk of inadequate cleansing using the Dik et al. score. All participants received the same instructions for morning colonoscopy preparation. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate preparations as defined by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Secondary outcomes included tolerability and measures of colonoscopy performance and quality.

Results A total of 582 subjects were randomized. Of these, 278 who received the liberal diet and 275 who received the 1-day LRD were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority was demonstrated with adequate preparation rates of 97.8% in the 1-day LRD and 96.4% in the liberal diet group. Tolerability was higher with the liberal diet (94.7% vs. 83.2%). No differences were found with respect to cecal intubation time, aspirated volume, or length of the examination. Global and right colon average adenoma detection rates per colonoscopy were similar.

Conclusions The liberal diet was non-inferior to the 1-day LRD, and increased tolerability. Colonoscopy performance and quality were not affected. (NCT05032794)

Keywords

Endoscopy Lower GI Tract - CRC screening - Preparation - Quality and logistical aspects - Quality management

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 22. September 2023

Angenommen nach Revision: 06. Januar 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
29. Januar 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
07. März 2024

• References

• 1 Axon ATR. Fifty years of digestive endoscopy: Successes, setbacks, solutions and the future. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 290-297
• 2 Hayman CV, Vyas D. Screening colonoscopy: The present and the future. World J Gastroenterol 2021; 27: 233-239
• 3 Bevan R, Rutter MD. Colorectal cancer screening—Who, how, and when?. Clin Endosc 2018; 51: 37-49
• 4 Comas M, Mendivil J, Andreu M. et al. Long-term prediction of the demand of colonoscopies generated by a population-based colorectal cancer screening program. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0164666
• 5 Rembacken B, Hassan C, Riemann J. et al. Quality in screening colonoscopy: position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Endoscopy 2012; 44: 957-968
• 6 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 31-53
• 7 Sharma P, Burke CA, Johnson DA. et al. The importance of colonoscopy bowel preparation for the detection of colorectal lesions and colorectal cancer prevention. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E673
• 8 Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers J-J. et al. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: The European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378-384
• 9 Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR. et al. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 1696-1700
• 10 The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Improving uptake of colorectal cancer screening. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 2: 767
• 11 Denters MJ, Deutekom M, Bossuyt PM. et al. Patient burden of colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 342-349
• 12 Walter J, Patel A, Matro R. et al. The impact of diet liberalization on bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: S162
• 13 Gómez-Reyes E, Tepox-Padrón A, Cano-Manrique G. et al. A low-residue diet before colonoscopy tends to improve tolerability by patients with no differences in preparation quality: a randomized trial. Surg Endosc 2020; 34: 3037-3042
• 14 Nguyen DL, Jamal MM, Nguyen ET. et al. Low-residue versus clear liquid diet before colonoscopy: A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 499-507.e1
• 15 Soweid AM, Dgayli K. The effect of fiber-free diet and splitting the dose of a low volume polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution on the quality of colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: Ab313-ab314
• 16 Gimeno-García AZ, De La Barreda Heuser R, Reygosa C. et al. Impact of a 1-day versus 3-day low-residue diet on bowel cleansing quality before colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 628-636
• 17 Machlab S, Martínez-Bauer E, López P. et al. Comparable quality of bowel preparation with single-day versus three-day low-residue diet: Randomized controlled trial. Dig Endosc 2020; 33: 797-806
• 18 Taveira F, Areia M, Elvas L. et al. A 3-day versus 1-day low residue diet to improve colonoscopy preparation result and patient tolerability, a randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial. United Eur Gastroenterol J 2019; 7: 547
• 19 Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC. et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013; 346
• 20 World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013; 310: 2191-2194
• 21 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R. et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377-381
• 22 Dik VK, Moons LMG, Hüyük M. et al. Predicting inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy in participants receiving split-dose bowel preparation: Development and validation of a prediction score. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 665-672
• 23 Gkolfakis P, Kapizioni C, Tziatzios G. et al. Comparative performance and external validation of three different scores in predicting inadequate bowel preparation among Greek inpatients undergoing colonoscopy. Ann Gastroenterol 2023; 36: 25-31
• 24 Calderwood AH, Logan JR, Zurfluh M. et al. Validity of a Web-based educational program to disseminate a standardized bowel preparation rating scale. J Clin Gastroenterol 2014; 48: 856-861
• 25 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G. et al. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 620-625
• 26 Hatoum HT, Lin S-J, Joseph RE. et al. Validation of a patient satisfaction scale in patients undergoing bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy. Patient 2016; 9: 27-34
• 27 Aoun E, Abdul-Baki H, Azar C. et al. A randomized single-blind trial of split-dose PEG-electrolyte solution without ietary restriction compared with whole dose PEG-electrolyte solution with dietary restriction for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 62: 213-218
• 28 Chang HJ, Algar U, Chu K. et al. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: is diet restriction necessary?. South African J Surg 2020; 58: 217E-217F