PURPOSE: To compare the cleansing effect, ease of preparation and side-effects of two cleansing regimens containing either polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) or phospho-soda (Na-P) solution prior to CT colonography in a prospective, randomized, radiologist-blinded design. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Fifty persons were randomized to receive either a PEG preparation or a Na-P preparation prior to CT colonography. On axial 2D images, the rectum, the sigmoid, the descending, the transverse and the cecum/ascending colon were scored semiquantitatively as to cleanness by two radiologists blinded to the bowel preparation regimen. Quality scores in the two groups were compared. Ease of preparation and side-effects were assessed by a questionnaire. RESULTS: The overall quality of the bowel preparation with the Na-P preparation was better than with the PEG preparation with significantly better cleansing scores for the rectum, the sigmoid, the descending and the transverse colon. The Na-P preparation was significantly better tolerated than the PEG preparation with significantly less nausea and significantly less fecal incontinence. CONCLUSION: The quality of the bowel preparation was better with the Na-P preparation than with the PEG preparation prior to CT colonography. Moreover, the Na-P preparation was better tolerated and with fewer side-effects.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the cleansing effect, ease of preparation and side-effects of two cleansing regimens containing either polyethylene glycol solution (PEG) or phospho-soda (Na-P) solution prior to CT colonography in a prospective, randomized, radiologist-blinded design. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty persons were randomized to receive either a PEG preparation or a Na-P preparation prior to CT colonography. On axial 2D images, the rectum, the sigmoid, the descending, the transverse and the cecum/ascending colon were scored semiquantitatively as to cleanness by two radiologists blinded to the bowel preparation regimen. Quality scores in the two groups were compared. Ease of preparation and side-effects were assessed by a questionnaire. RESULTS: The overall quality of the bowel preparation with the Na-P preparation was better than with the PEG preparation with significantly better cleansing scores for the rectum, the sigmoid, the descending and the transverse colon. The Na-P preparation was significantly better tolerated than the PEG preparation with significantly less nausea and significantly less fecal incontinence. CONCLUSION: The quality of the bowel preparation was better with the Na-P preparation than with the PEG preparation prior to CT colonography. Moreover, the Na-P preparation was better tolerated and with fewer side-effects.
Authors: Sebastiaan Jensch; Shandra Bipat; Jan Peringa; Ayso H de Vries; Anneke Heutinck; Evelien Dekker; Lubbertus C Baak; Alexander D Montauban van Swijndregt; Jaap Stoker Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 5.315