Objectives: Efficacy of two low volume bowel cleansing preparations, polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (PEG + Asc) and sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (NaPic/MgCit), were compared for polyp and adenoma detection rate (PDR and ADR) and overall cleansing ability. Primary endpoint was PDR (the number of patients with ≥ 1 polypoid or flat lesion recorded by the colonoscopist).

Methods: Diagnostic, surveillance or screening colonoscopy patients were enrolled into this investigator-blinded, multi-center Phase IV study and randomized 1:1 to receive PEG + Asc (administered the evening before and the morning of colonoscopy, per label) or NaPic/MgCit (administered in the morning and afternoon the day before colonoscopy, per label). The blinded colonoscopist documented any lesion and assessed cleansing quality (Harefield Cleansing Scale).

Results: Of 394 patients who completed the study, 393 (PEG + Asc, N = 200; NaPic/MgCit, N = 193) had a colonoscopy. Overall PDR for PEG+Asc versus NaPic/MgCit was 51.5% versus 44.0%, p = 0.139. PDR and ADR on the right side of the bowel were significantly higher with PEG + Asc versus NaPic/MgCit (PDR: 56[28.0%] versus 32[16.6%], p = 0.007; ADR: 42[21.0%] versus 23[11.9%], p = 0.015), as was detection of flat lesions (43[21.5%] versus 25[13.0%], p = 0.025). Cleansing quality was better with PEG + Asc than NaPic/MgCit (98.5% versus 57.5% considered successful cleansing). Overall, there were 132 treatment-emergent adverse events (93 versus 39 for PEG+Asc and NaPic/MgCit, respectively). These were mainly mild abdominal symptoms, all of which were reported for higher proportions of patients in the PEG+Asc than NaPic/MgCit group. Twice as many patients in the NaPic/MgCit versus the PEG + Asc group reported tolerance of cleansing solution as 'very good'.

Conclusions: Compared with NaPic/MgCit, PEG + Asc may be more efficacious for overall cleansing ability, and subsequent detection of right-sided and flat lesions. This is likely attributable to the different administration schedules of the two bowel cleansing preparations, which may positively impact the detection and prevention of colorectal cancer, thereby improving mortality rates.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01689792.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4423835PMC
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126067PLOS

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

peg asc
28
bowel cleansing
12
cleansing
10
napic/mgcit
10
versus
9
cleansing preparations
8
pdr adr
8
cleansing ability
8
colonoscopy label
8
cleansing quality
8

Similar Publications

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the United States. Early detection through colonoscopy significantly improves survival rates. Detecting colon polyps depends on the quality of bowel preparation.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background/aims: Optimization of bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is debated. Guidelines recommend 2 L of iso-osmolar polyethylene glycol (PEG) to improve SBCE visibility. We compared the efficacy of the standard 2 L PEG solution with a 1 L PEG plus ascorbate (PEG-ASC) preparation, which has already been established for large-bowel preparation.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC).

Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Comparative efficacy of different bowel preparations for colonoscopy: A network meta-analysis.

Dig Liver Dis

December 2024

Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.

Background And Aims: The quality of a colonoscopy is heavily reliant on the effectiveness of bowel cleansing. Various cleansing solutions are currently available, but their comparative efficacy remains uncertain. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the performance of different bowel preparations for colonoscopy.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Mannitol for bowel preparation: Efficacy and safety results from the SATISFACTION randomised clinical trial.

Dig Liver Dis

November 2024

Praxis für Gastroenterologie und Fachärztliche Innere Medizin, Im Haus der Gesundheit, Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.

Background: Bowel preparation represents a significant issue to high-quality colonoscopy. Oral mannitol requires a single dose, is of low volume, and has a pleasant taste and rapid action.

Aims: This SATISFACTION study compared single-dose (same day) oral mannitol 100 g/750 mL with standard split-dose PEG-ASC2 L (MoviPrep®).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!