Effectiveness and Safety of 1L Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid Preparation in Patients Aged ≥65 Years in a Large Real-World Population

Aims To evaluate the effectiveness/safety of 1L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid preparation (PEG+ASC) in elderly patients (≥65 years) in a large real-word population.

Methods This subgroup analysis of an observational, multicentre, retrospective study included outpatients aged ≥65 years who received 1L PEG+ASC before undergoing colonoscopy in 12 centres in Spain and Portugal (July 2019–September 2021). [1] Colon cleansing quality was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Adequate quality cleansing was defined as total BBPS score ≥6 and all segmental scores ≥2. High-quality cleansing was defined as a total BBPS score ≥8 and BBPS score of 3 in the right colon. Cecal intubation rate (CIR), withdrawal time (WT), polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) and adverese events (AEs) were also assessed.

Results Out of the 13,169 patients in the overall population, 3,929 (29.8%) were aged ≥65 years. Colonoscopy was completed in 96.3% of patients. Incomplete procedure was due to poor preparation in 0.9% of patients. Adequate quality cleansing in the overall colon was achieved in 88.3% of patients and high-quality colon cleansing rate was 52.2%. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) BBPS total score was 7.2 (1.9) for total colon, 2.3 (0.7) for right colon, 2.5 (0.7) for left colon and 2.5 (0.7) for transverse colon ([Table 1]). The incidence of AEs was 2.3%, most commonly nausea (0.8%) and vomiting (0.7%).

Table 1  Colonoscopy outcomes in elderly patients aged ≥65 years.

Conclusions Overall, 1L PEG+ASC was highly effective and well tolerated when used in elderly patients in daily clinical practice, with over half of patients attaining high-quality colon cleansing.

• 1 López-Jamar J.MEsteban, Muñoz SRodríguez, Gorjao R. et al. Real-World effectiveness and safety of the 1L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid bowel preparation for colonoscopy in the largest to date retrospective, multi-centre, observational study. United European Gastroenterology Journal 2022; 10 S8 S25-26