Comparison of four bowel cleansing agents for colonoscopy and the factors affecting their efficacy. A prospective, randomized study

3Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background & Aims: Adequate bowel preparation is essential for successful and effective colonoscopy. Several types of cleansing agents are currently available including low-volume solutions. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of four different bowel cleansing agents. Methods: A single-center, prospective, randomized, and single-blind study was performed. Consecutive patients referred for colonoscopy were enrolled and randomized into one of the following types of laxatives: polyethylenglycol 4L (PEG), oral sulfate solution (OSS), 2L polyethylenglycol + ascorbate (2L-PEG/Asc), or magnesium citrate + sodium picosulfate (MCSP). The primary outcome was quality of bowel cleansing evaluated according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR) and tolerability. Results: Final analysis was performed on 431 patients. The number of patients with adequate bowel preparation (BBPS total scores ≥6 and sub scores ≥2 in each segment) was not significantly different throughout all groups (95.4% PEG; 94.6% OSS; 96.3% 2L-PEG/Asc; 96.2% MCSP; p=0.955). Excellent bowel preparation (BBPS total scores ≥ 8) was associated with younger age (p=0.007). The groups did not have significantly different PDRs (49.5% PEG; 49.1% OSS; 38% 2L-PEG/Asc; 40.4% MCSP; p=0.201). The strongest predictors of pathology identification were age and male gender. The best-tolerated solution was MCSP (palatability: p<0.001; nausea: p=0.024). Conclusion: All tested laxatives provided comparable efficacy in terms of bowel cleansing quality and PDR. The low-volume agent MCSP was the best tolerated.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kmochova, K., Grega, T., Ngo, O., Vojtechova, G., Majek, O., Urbanek, P., … Suchanek, S. (2021). Comparison of four bowel cleansing agents for colonoscopy and the factors affecting their efficacy. A prospective, randomized study. Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, 30(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.15403/jgld-3401

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free