Literature DB >> 17029618

Safety and colon-cleansing efficacy of a new residue-free formulation of sodium phosphate tablets.

Douglas K Rex1, Howard Schwartz, Michael Goldstein, John Popp, Seymour Katz, Charles Barish, Robyn G Karlstadt, Martin Rose, Kelli Walker, Sandra Lottes, Nancy Ettinger, Bing Zhang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A residue-free sodium phosphate tablet (RF-NaP) was formulated that lacks microcrystalline cellulose, which can appear as a whitish residue in the colon. A multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded study was conducted to compare the colon-cleansing efficacy of 40 or 32 tablets of RF-NaP with the marketed 40-tablet NaP treatment regimen.
METHODS: Eight hundred sixteen patients were randomized prior to colonoscopy to receive either 40 tablets (60 g) of NaP or RF-NaP or 32 tablets (48 g) of RF-NaP. Colon cleansing was assessed using a 4-point scale based on retained "colonic contents." The primary end point was overall colon-cleansing response rate to treatment (score of excellent/good) versus nonresponse (fair/inadequate).
RESULTS: Seven hundred four patients were included in the efficacy analysis. The overall colon-cleansing response rates were comparable among treatment arms (94.5%, 97.0%, and 95.3% for NaP, RF-NaP 40, and RF-NaP 32 tablets, respectively). Ascending colon-cleansing response rates for RF-NaP 40 (95.7%) and 32 tablets (93.6%) were significantly better than for NaP tablets (88.5%, p < 0.03 for both). Patients treated with RF-NaP 32 tablets experienced less pronounced changes in electrolyte levels and fewer adverse events (138/239, 58%) compared with patients receiving NaP (161/238, 68%, p= 0.07) and RF-NaP 40 tablets (156/236, 66%, p= 0.03). The most common adverse events reported were abdominal distention, nausea, abdominal pain, and vomiting.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the safety, efficacy, and patient preferences, the 32-tablet RF-NaP regimen was superior to the 40-tablet RF-NaP and NaP regimen for colon cleansing prior to colonoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17029618     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00776.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  15 in total

1.  Bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  David E Beck
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2010-02

2.  Polyethylene glycol vs. sodium phosphate for bowel preparation: a treatment arm meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ravi Juluri; George Eckert; Thomas F Imperiale
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 3.  Oral colorectal cleansing preparations in adults.

Authors:  Sherief Shawki; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Colon cleansing before colonoscopy: does oral sodium phosphate solution still make sense?

Authors:  D K Rex; S J Vanner
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.522

5.  Randomized controlled trial of sodium phosphate tablets vs polyethylene glycol solution for colonoscopy bowel cleansing.

Authors:  Yoon Suk Jung; Chang Kyun Lee; Hyo Jong Kim; Chang Soo Eun; Dong Soo Han; Dong Il Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Bowel preparation for colonoscopy using standard vs reduced doses of sodium phosphate: A single-blind randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Tatsuya Koshitani; Mayumi Kawada; Toshikazu Yoshikawa
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-08-16

7.  Phosphate tablets or polyethylene glycol for preparation to colonoscopy? A multicentre non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Stanislas Chaussade; Christoph Schmöcker; Pierre Toulemonde; Miguel Muñoz-Navas; Valérie O'Mahony; Franck Henri
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Factors influencing quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Ronald V Romero; Sanjiv Mahadeva
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-02-16

9.  Randomized study comparing two regimens of oral sodium phosphates solution versus low-dose polyethylene glycol and bisacodyl.

Authors:  Pramod Malik; David H Balaban; William O Thompson; Deborah J B Galt
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-08-19       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  Evaluation of intestinal phosphate binding to improve the safety profile of oral sodium phosphate bowel cleansing.

Authors:  Stef Robijn; Benjamin A Vervaet; Patrick C D'Haese; Anja Verhulst
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.