Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼±Åà ´ëÀåÀýÁ¦¼ú¿¡¼­ Polyethylene Glycol°ú Sodium PhosphateÀÇ Àå¼¼Á¤ È¿°ú¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀüÇâÀû ºñ±³ ¿¬±¸ Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Polyethylene Glycol and Sodium Phosphate Oral Lavage Solutions

´ëÇÑ´ëÀåÇ×¹®ÇÐȸÁö 2004³â 20±Ç 1È£ p.27 ~ 31
À±¼ºÇö, °­Áß±¸,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À±¼ºÇö ( Yun Seong-Hyeon ) 
¼º±Õ°ü´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ »ï¼º¼­¿ïº´¿ø ¿Ü°úÇб³½Ç

°­Áß±¸ ( Kang Jung-Gu ) 
±¹¹Î°Ç°­º¸Çè°ø´Ü Àϻ꺴¿ø ¿Ü°ú

Abstract


Purpose: This study was undertaken to determine whether a mechanical bowel preparation with 90 ml of sodium phosphate (NaP) solution (Group II) increased the acceptability of bowel preparation and reduced discomfort compared with 2 liters of polyethylene glycol (PEG) combined with a bisacodyl 20 mg (Group I).

Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, single-blinded study. Forty-four patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in the National Health Insurance Corporation Ilsan Hospital from March 2002 to November 2002 were included in this study. We assessed the patients¢¥ tolerance and cleansing ability, as well as the surgeon¢¥s satisfaction, by using a structured questionnaire. Postoperative complications were also evaluated.

Results: Patient tolerance to NaP was higher than it was to PEG (P=0.034). The cleansing ability and the surgeon¢¥s satisfaction were not different between the two groups (P=0.217, P=0.349). There is no significant postoperative complication except for 1 case of wound infection in both group.

Conclusions: Both oral solutions proved to be equally effective and safe. However, patient tolerance to the small volume of NaP demonstrated a clear advantage over the traditional PEG solution. J Korean Soc Coloproctol 2004; 20:27-31

Å°¿öµå

¼ö¼úÀüóġ;ºñ±³¿¬±¸;Æú¸®¿¡Æ¿·»±Û¸®ÄÝ;Àλ꿰;°áÀåÁ÷Àå¼ö¼ú
Mechanical bowel preparation;Polyethylene glycols;Sodium phosphate;Colorectal surgery;Preoperative care

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS