Hypokalemia Following Polyethylene Glycol–Based Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy in Older Hospitalized Patients with Significant Comorbidities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparations (PEGBPs) are widely perceived as safe and effective alternatives to oral sodium phosphate for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Most studies supporting this belief involve young patients with few comorbidities. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the incidence of electrolyte disturbances following PEGBPs administered prior to colonoscopy among elderly inpatients and hypothesize that PEGBP would be associated with hypokalemia in this setting. METHODS: This retrospective chart review, conducted at 3 tertiary care teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada, from 2005 to 2007, included 96 consecutive patients aged 65 or older who were admitted to the hospital and given PEGBP prior to their first inpatient colonoscopy. Patients were excluded if they received additional cathartics, underwent colonoscopy while admitted to a critical care unit, or were admitted for a complication arising from an outpatient colonoscopy. The primary outcome was hypokalemia (serum potassium < or =3.2 mEq/L) within 48 hours of PEGBP. RESULTS: Of 96 patients, 73 had serum electrolytes measured at baseline and within 48 hours following PEGBP administration. Hypokalemia was identified in 4 patients (5.5%) prior to PEGBP and in 15 patients (20.5%) after PEGBP (p < 0.001). The incidence of significant hypokalemia, defined as serum potassium < or =3.0 mEq/L, in this group was 9.6% (p = 0.008). We found consistent results among patients with and without concomitant diuretic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among older patients, administration of PEGBP is commonly complicated by the development of hypokalemia, which is occasionally severe. Monitoring of electrolytes may be necessary following colonoscopy, particularly in patients with cardiac or renal disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".