BACKGROUND: Low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy improve tolerability. OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of a new low-volume sulfate solution with a standard 4-L polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. DESIGN: Multicenter, single-blind, randomized, noninferiority study. SETTING: Five academic and community endoscopy centers in the United States. PATIENTS: One hundred thirty-six outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive 4 L sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution (SF-ELS) given the night before colonoscopy versus 12 oz oral sulfate solution (OSS) given in equally divided doses the evening before and the morning of colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Successful (ie, good or excellent) bowel preparation. RESULTS: Successful bowel preparation was more frequent with OSS than with SF-ELS (98.4% vs 89.6%; P = .04). Excellent preparation also was achieved more frequently with OSS (71.4% vs 34.3%; P < .001). Patients receiving OSS had less residual stool in the cecum and ascending colon and less residual fluid in the cecum and ascending, transverse, and descending colon compared with SF-ELS. The percentage of patients with GI side effects and adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: The OSS was administered in split doses, whereas the SF-ELS was administered the evening before (which is its FDA-approved regimen). CONCLUSIONS:Oral sulfate solution is promising as a safe low-volume preparation for colonoscopy. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00856843.). Copyright 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy improve tolerability. OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of a new low-volume sulfate solution with a standard 4-L polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. DESIGN: Multicenter, single-blind, randomized, noninferiority study. SETTING: Five academic and community endoscopy centers in the United States. PATIENTS: One hundred thirty-six outpatients undergoing colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to receive 4 L sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution (SF-ELS) given the night before colonoscopy versus 12 oz oral sulfate solution (OSS) given in equally divided doses the evening before and the morning of colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Successful (ie, good or excellent) bowel preparation. RESULTS: Successful bowel preparation was more frequent with OSS than with SF-ELS (98.4% vs 89.6%; P = .04). Excellent preparation also was achieved more frequently with OSS (71.4% vs 34.3%; P < .001). Patients receiving OSS had less residual stool in the cecum and ascending colon and less residual fluid in the cecum and ascending, transverse, and descending colon compared with SF-ELS. The percentage of patients with GI side effects and adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: The OSS was administered in split doses, whereas the SF-ELS was administered the evening before (which is its FDA-approved regimen). CONCLUSIONS:Oral sulfate solution is promising as a safe low-volume preparation for colonoscopy. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00856843.). Copyright 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Fw Leung; Jo Harker; Jw Leung; Rm Siao-Salera; Sk Mann; Fc Ramirez; S Friedland; A Amato; F Radaelli; S Paggi; V Terruzzi; Yh Hsieh Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2011-07-01
Authors: Vladimir M Kushnir; Pavan Bhat; Reena V Chokshi; Alexander Lee; Brian B Borg; Chandra Prakash Gyawali; Gregory S Sayuk Journal: Dig Liver Dis Date: 2013-09-06 Impact factor: 4.088
Authors: Phillip Gu; Daniel Lew; Sun Jung Oh; Aarshi Vipani; Jeffrey Ko; Kevin Hsu; Ebrahim Mirakhor; Varun Pattisapu; Tia Bullen; Garth Fuller; Brennan M R Spiegel; Christopher V Almario Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Joseph W Leung; Lynne D Do; Rodelei M Siao-Salera; Catherine Ngo; Dhavan A Parikh; Surinder K Mann; Felix W Leung Journal: J Interv Gastroenterol Date: 2011-01