Comparison Of The Effects Of Different Intestinal Preparation Schemes And Transparent Cap On The Quality Of Colonoscopy

Objective:To explore the impact of different bowel preparation programs and transparent caps on the quality of colonoscopy.Methods:From June 1,2019 to December 20,2019,2000 patients in the ChinaJapan Union Hospital of Jilin University were selected and randomly divided into groups A,B,C,and D,each with 500 patients Patients in groups A,B,and C were given different bowel preparation programs.The patients in group A took 3L of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution5 hours before the examination on the day of the examination;the patients in group B took polyglycol electrolyte solution 1 hour after dinner the day before the examination.1L of ethylene glycol electrolyte solution,2L of polyethylene glycol solution was taken again 5h before the examination on the day of the examination;the patients in group C took3 L of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution on the day of the examination 5h before the examination,and then took 300 mg of simethicone(melting)Prepare a solution in 30-50 ml of water);patients in group D took 3L of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution 5 hours before the examination on the day of the examination,and a transparent cap should be used during the examination.Analyze the impact of different bowel preparation programs on the quality of colonoscopy and the transparent cap to assist the colon through indicators such as intestinal cleanliness,defoaming degree,tolerance and compliance,polyp detection rate,and the number and location of polyps detected The effect of microscopy on the results.Results:The effective cleanliness of group A was 79%,of which 25 patients had bowel cleanliness scores of 0-3 points,80 patients scored 4-5 points,and 395 patients had bowel cleansing scores of more than 6 points;group B was effective The cleanliness was 89%,of which 5 patients scored within0-3 points,50 patients scored within 4-5 points,and 445 patients exceeded6 points.A total of 105 patients in group A had adverse reactions,and a total of 40 patients in group B.Comparing the results of intestinal cleanliness,group B is better than group A,and the difference is statistically significant(p<0.05);comparing the results of the total adverse reaction rate,group B is lower than group A,and the difference is statistically significant(p<0.05).In group C,there were 84 patients with a defoaming degree of 2 points,20 patients with a score of 3,and396 patients achieved satisfactory clarity;in group A,there were 135 patients with a defoaming degree of 2 and 75 patients with a score of 3.The number of cases reached satisfactory clarity was 290;the defoaming effect of group C was better than that of group A,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In terms of intestinal cleanliness,there is no significant difference in the results of effective cleanliness between group A and group C(P>0.05),but in the 8-9 zone,the number of people in group C is 110 and the number of people in group A is 74.There is a difference There is statistical significance(P<0.05).Polyps were found in 151 patients in group D,and the polyp detection rate was 30.1%.A total of 433 polyps were found,including 162 liver and splenic flexures,and 155 sigmoid colon;group A found 113 patients with polyps,group A polyps The detection rate was 22.6%.A total of 290 polyps were found,of which 100 were hepatic flexure and splenic flexure,and 84 were sigmoid colon.These differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).Comparing the results of entry success rate and withdrawal time,there was no significant difference between the A and D groups(P>0.05).Comparing the compliance of the four groups of patients(using the same method again for examination willingness),the results showed that the three groups of patients B,C,and D were compared with group A respectively.The compliance of the three groups of B,C,and D was better,and the same was used again.Methods The willingness to check was higher,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).In this study,the four groups A,B,C,and D did not have colonoscopy-related complications.Conclusion:1.Taking PEG in divided doses can improve intestinal cleanliness and reduce the overall incidence of adverse reactions;2.The combination of polyethylene glycol electrolyte and simethicone can reduce intestinal bubbles and improve the clarity of the visual field under the endoscope;3.The use of transparent caps in colonoscopy can increase the detection rate of polyps,especially polyps behind the mucosal folds and in the tortuous position of the intestine,and reduce the incidence of missed diagnosis.It has a positive promotion significance in clinical applications.