Nae Yun Heo

Optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy interval in split-dose PEG bowel preparation determines satisfactory bowel preparation quality: an observational prospective study.

BACKGROUND Several factors influence bowel preparation quality. Recent studies have indicated that the time interval between bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy is also important in determining bowel preparation quality. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the influence of the preparation-to-colonoscopy (PC) interval (the interval of time between the last polyethylene glycol dose ingestion and the start of the colonoscopy) on bowel preparation quality in the split-dose method for colonoscopy. DESIGN Prospective observational study. SETTING University medical center. PATIENTS A total of 366 consecutive outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. INTERVENTION Split-dose bowel preparation and colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS The quality of bowel preparation was assessed by using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale according to the PC interval, and other factors that might influence bowel preparation quality were analyzed. RESULTS Colonoscopies with a PC interval of 3 to 5 hours had the best bowel preparation quality score in the whole, right, mid, and rectosigmoid colon according to the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale. In multivariate analysis, the PC interval (odds ratio [OR] 1.85; 95% CI, 1.18-2.86), the amount of PEG ingested (OR 4.34; 95% CI, 1.08-16.66), and compliance with diet instructions (OR 2.22l 95% CI, 1.33-3.70) were significant contributors to satisfactory bowel preparation. LIMITATIONS Nonrandomized controlled, single-center trial. CONCLUSIONS The optimal time interval between the last dose of the agent and the start of colonoscopy is one of the important factors to determine satisfactory bowel preparation quality in split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation.

Low-Volume Morning-Only Polyethylene Glycol with Specially Designed Test Meals versus Standard-Volume Split-Dose Polyethylene Glycol with Standard Diet for Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized Trial

Background/Aims: Split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a standard bowel preparation regimen for colonoscopy, but the large volume is burdensome to ingest and the night dose causes sleep disturbance. This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a bowel preparation protocol using low-volume morning-only PEG with specially designed low-residue test meals (LV-PEG with TM) compared to a standard-volume split-dose PEG bowel preparation with a standard diet (SV-PEG with SD). Methods: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded, noninferiority study. The primary end point was bowel preparation quality according to the Ottawa scale. Tolerability, compliance, adverse events, sleep quality and polyp/adenoma detection were also assessed. Results: Among 197 patients analyzed (mean age 54.6 years, 51.3% men), 97 received LV-PEG with TM and 100 received SV-PEG with SD. The Ottawa score for the total colon was 3.76 ± 2.07 in the LV-PEG with TM group and 3.67 ± 1.57 in the SV-PEG with SD group (p = 0.723; difference 0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.60 to 0.42). The compliance was high (more than 95%) in both groups (p = 0.621). PEG was easier to ingest for patients in the LV-PEG with TM group compared to the SV-PEG with SD group [visual analogue scale (VAS) for difficulty: 4.64 ± 2.46 vs. 5.97 ± 2.42, respectively; p < 0.001]. Diet instructions were also easier to comply with for patients in the LV-PEG with TM group compared to the SV-PEG with SD group (VAS for difficulty: 3.11 ± 2.25 vs. 4.00 ± 2.39, respectively; p = 0.008). Patients in the LV-PEG with TM group had a lower incidence of abdominal bloating (p = 0.012) and better sleep quality (p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups regarding polyp and adenoma detection. Conclusions: LV-PEG with TM and SV-PEG with SD have similar efficacy with regard to bowel preparation for colonoscopy. LV-PEG with TM provided easier PEG intake and diet compliance, less abdominal bloating and better sleep quality than SV-PEG with SD.

The efficacy and safety of carbon dioxide insufflation during colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy in moderately sedated outpatients: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

Goals and Background: Colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy (CCEGD) can be more convenient than performing each procedure individually. There has been no randomized controlled trial comparing carbon dioxide (CO2) versus air insufflations during CCEGD in sedated patients. CO2 insufflation instead of air during CCEGD may reduce abdominal pain and be more comfortable. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CO2 insufflation during CCEGD in moderately sedated outpatients. Study: This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. A total of 96 outpatients were randomly assigned to the groups of CO2 or air insufflation. Postprocedure pain was assessed using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, and the proportion of pain-free patients was compared between the groups. Waist circumferences and end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) were measured. Results: Among 96 patients, cecal intubation failed in 2 patients, who were excluded from the analysis. Forty-eight patients in the CO2 and 46 patients in the air group completed the study. There was significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the proportion of pain-free patients 30 minutes after the procedures [air group, 35/46 (76.1%) vs. CO2 group, 44/48 (91.6%)] (P=0.03). However, there was no significant difference in the proportion at 6 and 24 hours after the procedures. The mean increase in waist circumference was greater with air than with CO2 (1.54 vs. 0.18 cm, P<0.001). The ETCO2 measured immediately after the procedures was slightly higher in the CO2 group than in the air group (38.6 vs. 37.2 mm Hg, P=0.02), but the values were within the normal range. No significant adverse events occurred. Conclusions: CO2 insufflation during CCEGD reduced postprocedural pain and distension compared with air. It was comfortable and safe to use in moderately sedated outpatients.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Tolerability between Same-day Picosulfate and Split-dose Polyethylene Glycol Bowel Preparation for Afternoon Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized, Investigator-blinded Trial

Background/Aims In the present study, we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability between same-day bowel preparation protocols using 2 sachets of Picosulfate and a 4 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation for afternoon colonoscopy. Methods The study had a single-center, prospective, randomized, and investigator-blinded, non-inferiority design. We evaluated bowel preparation quality according to the Ottawa scale, patient tolerability, compliance, incidence of adverse events, sleep quality, and polyp/adenoma detection rate. Results Among the 196 patients analyzed (mean age, 55.3 years; 50.3% men), 97 received the same-day regimen of 2 sachets of picosulfate (group A) and 99 received the 4 L split-dose PEG regimen (group B). The Ottawa score of the total colon was 4.05±1.56 in group A and 3.80±1.55 in group B (P=0.255). The proportion of patients having adequate bowel preparation in the same-day picosulfate group (61.5%) was slightly less than the 4 L PEG group (71.3%); however, the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.133). Tolerability of the group A regimen was superior to that of the group B regimen (P<0.000). The same-day picosulfate regimen was associated with fewer adverse events, such as abdominal bloating (P=0.037) and better sleep quality (P<0.000). Conclusions The same-day picosulfate regimen and the 4 L split-dose PEG regimen had similar efficacy in bowel preparation for afternoon colonoscopy. However, the same-day picosulfate regimen was easier to administer, produced fewer adverse events, and enabled better sleep quality.

Does Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Plus Ascorbic Acid Induce More Mucosal Injuries than Split-Dose 4-L PEG during Bowel Preparation?

Background/Aims The aims of this study were to compare the bowel-cleansing efficacy, patient affinity for the preparation solution, and mucosal injury between a split dose of poly-ethylene glycol (SD-PEG) and low-volume PEG plus ascorbic acid (LV-PEG+Asc) in outpatient scheduled colonoscopies. Methods Of the 319 patients, 160 were enrolled for SD-PEG, and 159 for LV-PEG+Asc. The bowel-cleansing efficacy was rated according to the Ottawa bowel preparation scale. Patient affinity for the preparation solution was assessed using a questionnaire. All mucosal injuries observed during colonoscopy were biopsied and histopathologically reviewed. Results There was no significant difference in bowel cleansing between the groups. The LV-PEG+Asc group reported better patient acceptance and preference. There were no significant differences in the incidence or characteristics of the mucosal injuries between the two groups. Conclusions Compared with SD-PEG, LV-PEG+Asc exhibited equivalent bowel-cleansing efficacy and resulted in improved patient acceptance and preference. There was no significant difference in mucosal injury between SD-PEG and LV-PEG+Asc. Thus, the LV-PEG+Asc preparation could be used more effectively and easily for routine colonoscopies without risking significant mucosal injury.

Upper reference limits for aminotransferase activities and the prevalence of elevated aminotransferase activities in a Korean population.

Background: Despite suggestions to lower the upper reference limits (URL) for aminotransferase activities to increase the detection of liver disease, there is no generally accepted URL in the general Korean population. Methods: We set the URL for alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) activities at the 97.5th percentile in a population at low risk for liver disease (n=3316; negative HBs antigen, low alcohol intake, normal waist circumference, normal lipid or carbohydrate metabolism, and absence of medication use) derived from the 2007 to 2009 Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES; n=16,608). Results: The URLs for ALT activity were 53 IU/L for men and 30 IU/L for women, and the corresponding limits for AST activity were 37 IU/L for men and 29 IU/L for women. The age-adjusted prevalence of the elevated ALT activity was 8.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.2%-9.1%] in the 2007 to 2009 KNHANES and 6.9% (95% CI, 6.3%-7.5%) in the 2001 KNHANES, a relative increase of 24.6% (P<0.05). This increase was concentrated among those aged 20 to 29, with a relative increase of 66.7%, and those aged 30 to 39, with a relative increase of 54.4%. There was no significant change in the prevalence of elevated AST activity. Conclusions: The URL for ALT activity among the general Korean population is clearly higher than recently proposed thresholds. The trajectory of the increasing prevalence of elevated ALT activity heralds an increased burden of chronic liver disease in the future Korean population.

Obesity, insulin resistance, and the risk of an elevated alanine aminotransferase activity in the Korean adolescent population.

Abstract Background: It is unclear to what extent insulin resistance (IR) modulates the association linking obesity to alanine aminotransferase (ALT) activity elevation. Methods: We measured the homeostatic model assessment for IR (HOMA-IR) in 1591 participants aged 12–18 years from the 2008 to 2009 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Results: Overweight adolescents had an odds ratio of 7.23 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 4.33–12.10] for an elevated ALT activity compared with normal-weight adolescents, and the corresponding risk was 23.62 (95% CI, 12.98–42.98) in obese adolescents. Adjustments for other participant factors did not substantially affect the results. The addition of the HOMA-IR data decreased the estimate for overweight adolescents by 27% and for obese adolescents, the decrease was 47%. Both obesity and IR markers remained independent predictors of outcome. Conclusions: The greater the obesity level, the more that IR contributes to the association between obesity and an elevated ALT activity.

Concomitant Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptom Syndrome from Ethambutol and Autoimmune Hepatitis from Isoniazid

Anti-tuberculosis drugs can produce levels of hepatotoxicity ranging from mild elevation of aminotransferase to severe acute hepatitis. A few cases of drug-induced autoimmune hepatitis or the drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptom (DRESS) syndrome by anti-tuberculosis medications have been reported. However, concomitant occurrence of these two disorders has not been reported. Here, we present a case of severe acute hepatitis with DRESS syndrome and autoimmune hepatitis resulting from primary standard anti-tuberculosis drugs. Both conditions were successfully treated with a systemic steroid regimen.

A Case of Co-Infection with Orientia Tsutsugamushi, Acute Hepatitis B,and Mycoplasma Pneumoniae in a Child with Fever and Systemic Rash

Background: Systemic rash combined with prolonged fever requires a differential diagnosis of possible diseases including infectious diseases. Although scrub typhus can cause co-infection with leptospirosis, co-infection with Orientia tsutsugamushi and Mycoplasma pneumoniae is thought to be rare, with only one case reported in a young adult. However, to date, there have been no reports of simultaneous co-infection with three pathogens, including Orientia tsutsugamushi, hepatitis B, and Mycoplasma pneumoniae. Case: We report a child simultaneously co-infected with Orientia tsutsugamushi, acute hepatitis B, and Mycoplasma pneumoniae, which made her prolonged fever and systemic rash with mild itching. On day 2 of hospitalization, an eschar on the left inguinal area became prominent and antibodies against Orientia tsutsugamushi showed levels = 1:1520. Owing to an elevation in the levels of liver enzymes at admission, IgM for hepatitis B surface antigen was positive and IgG for hepatitis B surface antigen was negative. Following two days of tetracycline administration, the fever subsided and the systemic area skin rashes gradually improved. Conclusion: Proper evaluation based on the presenting symptoms during the illness is important to ensure that the differential diagnosis is not overlooked.