S Haas1, L M Andersen, T Sommer. 1. Department of Surgery, Randers Regional Hospital, Skovlyvej 1, 8900, Randers, Denmark, susahaas@rm.dk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Introducing colonoscopy as part of colorectal cancer screening on a national level, we aimed at evaluating the efficacy of the two most common bowel cleansing agents, Moviprep(®) and Phosphoral(®). Secondly, we evaluated the benefit for the patient and society in terms of sick leave and discomfort. METHODS: In a single-blinded randomized equivalence trial, Phosphoral(®) (NaP) was compared with Moviprep(®) (2 l polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid) in patients undergoing colonoscopy due to suspicion of cancer. Patients filled out questionnaires concerning stool consistency, discomfort and number of sick days due to bowel cleansing. Blinded colonoscopists estimated the efficiency of the cleansing using the validated Harefield Cleansing Scale. RESULTS:Two hundred and sixty-six patients were included 250 of whom underwent full colonoscopy. There was no difference in the percentage of acceptable bowel cleansings in the two groups; however, a significantly higher number of A scores were observed in the Moviprep(®) group (p = 0.028). We found no correlation between stool consistency and outcome of the cleansing and no difference in subjective discomfort during cleansing. Vomiting during cleansing occurred more often in the Phosphoral(®) group (p = 0.002). There was a trend toward a smaller number of sick days in patients who used Moviprep(®) compared with Phosphoral(®). CONCLUSIONS:Moviprep(®) and Phosphoral(®) provided equally efficient bowel cleansing in 90 % of patients, but Moviprep(®) provided a higher quality of cleansings graded as successful. The two agents were equally tolerated, and no difference was found in the related number of sick days.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Introducing colonoscopy as part of colorectal cancer screening on a national level, we aimed at evaluating the efficacy of the two most common bowel cleansing agents, Moviprep(®) and Phosphoral(®). Secondly, we evaluated the benefit for the patient and society in terms of sick leave and discomfort. METHODS: In a single-blinded randomized equivalence trial, Phosphoral(®) (NaP) was compared with Moviprep(®) (2 l polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid) in patients undergoing colonoscopy due to suspicion of cancer. Patients filled out questionnaires concerning stool consistency, discomfort and number of sick days due to bowel cleansing. Blinded colonoscopists estimated the efficiency of the cleansing using the validated Harefield Cleansing Scale. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-six patients were included 250 of whom underwent full colonoscopy. There was no difference in the percentage of acceptable bowel cleansings in the two groups; however, a significantly higher number of A scores were observed in the Moviprep(®) group (p = 0.028). We found no correlation between stool consistency and outcome of the cleansing and no difference in subjective discomfort during cleansing. Vomiting during cleansing occurred more often in the Phosphoral(®) group (p = 0.002). There was a trend toward a smaller number of sick days in patients who used Moviprep(®) compared with Phosphoral(®). CONCLUSIONS:Moviprep(®) and Phosphoral(®) provided equally efficient bowel cleansing in 90 % of patients, but Moviprep(®) provided a higher quality of cleansings graded as successful. The two agents were equally tolerated, and no difference was found in the related number of sick days.
Authors: Dina Kao; Eoin Lalor; Gurpal Sandha; Richard N Fedorak; Bloeme van der Knoop; Stieneke Doornweerd; Harmke van Kooten; Eline Schreuders; William Midodzi; Sander Veldhuyzen van Zanten Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.522
Authors: David H Balaban; Byrd S Leavell; Michael J Oblinger; William O Thompson; Nancy D Bolton; Daniel J Pambianco Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 10.864