Cargando…

Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation

Background and study aims: Polyethylene glycol-based electrolyte solutions (PEG-ELS) and the combination of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) are commonly used bowel preparation agents. The aim of the present study was to compare the two agents with regard to cleansing efficacy and toleran...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leitao, Kristian, Grimstad, Tore, Bretthauer, Michael, Holme, Øyvind, Paulsen, Vemund, Karlsen, Lars, Isaksen, Kjetil, Cvancarova, Milada, Aabakken, Lars
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4423298/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26135098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1377520
_version_ 1782370190344847360
author Leitao, Kristian
Grimstad, Tore
Bretthauer, Michael
Holme, Øyvind
Paulsen, Vemund
Karlsen, Lars
Isaksen, Kjetil
Cvancarova, Milada
Aabakken, Lars
author_facet Leitao, Kristian
Grimstad, Tore
Bretthauer, Michael
Holme, Øyvind
Paulsen, Vemund
Karlsen, Lars
Isaksen, Kjetil
Cvancarova, Milada
Aabakken, Lars
author_sort Leitao, Kristian
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims: Polyethylene glycol-based electrolyte solutions (PEG-ELS) and the combination of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) are commonly used bowel preparation agents. The aim of the present study was to compare the two agents with regard to cleansing efficacy and tolerance among individuals scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy. Materials and methods: The 368 colonoscopy outpatients at three Norwegian hospitals were randomized to bowel lavage with either PEG-ELS or SPMC. Compliance and patient tolerance were evaluated using a patient questionnaire. Bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPS), a validated scoring system with scores between 0 (best) and 14. Results: There was no difference in the cleansing quality between the PEG-ELS and SPMC groups (median OBPS 5.0 in both groups). The group that received SPMC reported better overall patient tolerance than the PEG-ELS group (72.6 % vs 59.0 % reporting no or slight discomfort, P < 0.01). Compliance with the recommended total fluid intake (4 L) was better in the SPMC group than in the PEG-ELS group (94.2 % vs 81.2 % respectively, P < 0.01); moreover, the polyp detection rate was superior (34.3 % vs 23.3 %, P = 0.02). Conclusion: PEG-ELS and SPMC are equally effective in cleansing efficacy, but SPMC was better tolerated by patients and resulted in superior patient compliance and polyp detection rate. Clinical trial registration: NCT01624454
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4423298
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44232982015-06-23 Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation Leitao, Kristian Grimstad, Tore Bretthauer, Michael Holme, Øyvind Paulsen, Vemund Karlsen, Lars Isaksen, Kjetil Cvancarova, Milada Aabakken, Lars Endosc Int Open Article Background and study aims: Polyethylene glycol-based electrolyte solutions (PEG-ELS) and the combination of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) are commonly used bowel preparation agents. The aim of the present study was to compare the two agents with regard to cleansing efficacy and tolerance among individuals scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy. Materials and methods: The 368 colonoscopy outpatients at three Norwegian hospitals were randomized to bowel lavage with either PEG-ELS or SPMC. Compliance and patient tolerance were evaluated using a patient questionnaire. Bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPS), a validated scoring system with scores between 0 (best) and 14. Results: There was no difference in the cleansing quality between the PEG-ELS and SPMC groups (median OBPS 5.0 in both groups). The group that received SPMC reported better overall patient tolerance than the PEG-ELS group (72.6 % vs 59.0 % reporting no or slight discomfort, P < 0.01). Compliance with the recommended total fluid intake (4 L) was better in the SPMC group than in the PEG-ELS group (94.2 % vs 81.2 % respectively, P < 0.01); moreover, the polyp detection rate was superior (34.3 % vs 23.3 %, P = 0.02). Conclusion: PEG-ELS and SPMC are equally effective in cleansing efficacy, but SPMC was better tolerated by patients and resulted in superior patient compliance and polyp detection rate. Clinical trial registration: NCT01624454 © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014-12 2014-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4423298/ /pubmed/26135098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1377520 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Article
Leitao, Kristian
Grimstad, Tore
Bretthauer, Michael
Holme, Øyvind
Paulsen, Vemund
Karlsen, Lars
Isaksen, Kjetil
Cvancarova, Milada
Aabakken, Lars
Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title_full Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title_fullStr Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title_full_unstemmed Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title_short Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
title_sort polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4423298/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26135098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1377520
work_keys_str_mv AT leitaokristian polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT grimstadtore polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT bretthauermichael polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT holmeøyvind polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT paulsenvemund polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT karlsenlars polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT isaksenkjetil polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT cvancarovamilada polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation
AT aabakkenlars polyethyleneglycolvssodiumpicosulfatemagnesiumcitrateforcolonoscopypreparation