AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of a colonoscopy preparation that utilizes a reduced dose of sodium phosphate (NaP) and an adjunct. METHODS: Sixty-two patients requiring screening colonoscopies were studied. Each patient was randomly allocated to receive either 50 NaP tablets (50 g) or 30 NaP tablets (30 g) with 10 mL of 0.75% sodium picosulfate for bowel preparation. NaP was administered at a rate of five tablets (5 g) or three tablets (3 g) every 15 min with 200 mL of water, beginning five to six hours before colonoscopy. The sodium picosulfate was administered with 200 mL of water on the night before the procedure. Both groups were compared in term of the efficacies of colonic cleansing, the time required for completion of the bowel preparation, and acceptability of the preparation. RESULTS:Sixty patients (n = 30 for each group) were analyzed. The cleansing efficacy tended to be higher in the 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate group as assessed by the mean total Ottawa scale score (50 g NaP 6.70 ± 1. 42 vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 6.17 ± 1.18 P = 0.072). The mean time for bowel preparation tended to be shorter in the 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate group (50 g NaP 189.9 ± 64.0 min vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 161.8 ± 57.6 min, P = 0.065). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the acceptability of the preparations (50 g NaP 83.3% vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 86.7%, P = 0.500). There were no adverse events related to bowel preparation in either of the groups. CONCLUSION: The colonoscopy preparation that utilized 30 g NaP with sodium picosulfate was comparable to that utilizing 50 g NaP. This novel bowel preparation might be useful before colonoscopy.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of a colonoscopy preparation that utilizes a reduced dose of sodium phosphate (NaP) and an adjunct. METHODS: Sixty-two patients requiring screening colonoscopies were studied. Each patient was randomly allocated to receive either 50 NaP tablets (50 g) or 30 NaP tablets (30 g) with 10 mL of 0.75% sodium picosulfate for bowel preparation. NaP was administered at a rate of five tablets (5 g) or three tablets (3 g) every 15 min with 200 mL of water, beginning five to six hours before colonoscopy. The sodium picosulfate was administered with 200 mL of water on the night before the procedure. Both groups were compared in term of the efficacies of colonic cleansing, the time required for completion of the bowel preparation, and acceptability of the preparation. RESULTS: Sixty patients (n = 30 for each group) were analyzed. The cleansing efficacy tended to be higher in the 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate group as assessed by the mean total Ottawa scale score (50 g NaP 6.70 ± 1. 42 vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 6.17 ± 1.18 P = 0.072). The mean time for bowel preparation tended to be shorter in the 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate group (50 g NaP 189.9 ± 64.0 min vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 161.8 ± 57.6 min, P = 0.065). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the acceptability of the preparations (50 g NaP 83.3% vs 30 g NaP plus sodium picosulfate 86.7%, P = 0.500). There were no adverse events related to bowel preparation in either of the groups. CONCLUSION: The colonoscopy preparation that utilized 30 g NaP with sodium picosulfate was comparable to that utilizing 50 g NaP. This novel bowel preparation might be useful before colonoscopy.
Authors: Petar Mamula; Douglas G Adler; Jason D Conway; David L Diehl; Francis A Farraye; Sergey V Kantsevoy; Vivek Kaul; Sripathi R Kethu; Richard S Kwon; Sarah A Rodriguez; William M Tierney Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Lawrence Wruble; Michael Demicco; Jeffrey Medoff; Alan Safdi; Jeffrey Bernstein; Douglas Dalke; Martin Rose; Robyn G Karlstadt; Nancy Ettinger; Bing Zhang Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2006-12-14 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Douglas K Rex; Howard Schwartz; Michael Goldstein; John Popp; Seymour Katz; Charles Barish; Robyn G Karlstadt; Martin Rose; Kelli Walker; Sandra Lottes; Nancy Ettinger; Bing Zhang Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-10-04 Impact factor: 10.864