Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study
Background/Aims This study compared the efficacy, compliance, and safety of bowel preparation between sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) and oral sulfate solution (OSS). Methods A prospective randomized multicenter study was performed. Split preparation methods were performed in both g...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases
2019-07-01
|
| Series: | Intestinal Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.irjournal.org/upload/pdf/ir-2018-00156.pdf |
| _version_ | 1828515018566533120 |
|---|---|
| author | Jeeyeon Kim Hyun Gun Kim Kyeong Ok Kim Hyung Wook Kim Jongha Park Jeong-Sik Byeon Sung-Wook Hwang Hyun Deok Shin Jeong Eun Shin Hyo-Joon Yang Hyun Seok Lee Yunho Jung Young-Seok Cho Young Eun Joo Dae-Seong Myung Kyu Chan Huh Eu Mi Ahn |
| author_facet | Jeeyeon Kim Hyun Gun Kim Kyeong Ok Kim Hyung Wook Kim Jongha Park Jeong-Sik Byeon Sung-Wook Hwang Hyun Deok Shin Jeong Eun Shin Hyo-Joon Yang Hyun Seok Lee Yunho Jung Young-Seok Cho Young Eun Joo Dae-Seong Myung Kyu Chan Huh Eu Mi Ahn |
| author_sort | Jeeyeon Kim |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background/Aims This study compared the efficacy, compliance, and safety of bowel preparation between sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) and oral sulfate solution (OSS). Methods A prospective randomized multicenter study was performed. Split preparation methods were performed in both groups; the SPMC group, 2 sachets on the day before, and 1 sachet on the day of the procedure, the OSS group, half of the OSS with 1 L of water on both the day before and the day of the procedure. The adenoma detection rate (ADR), adequacy of bowel preparation using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, patient satisfaction on a visual analog scale (VAS), and safety were compared between the 2 groups. Results This study analyzed 229 patients (121 in the SPMC group and 108 in the OSS group). ADR showed no differences between 2 groups (51.7% vs. 41.7%, P>0.05). The mean total BBPS score (7.95 vs. 8.11, P>0.05) and adequate bowel preparation rate (94.9% vs. 96.3%, P>0.05) were similar between the 2 groups. The mean VAS score for taste (7.62 vs. 6.87, P=0.006) was significantly higher in the SPMC group than in the OSS group. There were no significant differences in any other safety variables between the 2 groups except nausea symptom (36.1% vs. 20.3%, P=0.008). Conclusions Bowel preparation for colonoscopy using low volume OSS and SPMC yielded similar ADRs and levels of efficacy. SPMC had higher levels of satisfaction for taste and feeling than did OSS. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-11T18:07:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e6a7aed09efe48c9a01162827f8f9430 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1598-9100 2288-1956 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-11T18:07:37Z |
| publishDate | 2019-07-01 |
| publisher | Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Intestinal Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-e6a7aed09efe48c9a01162827f8f94302022-12-22T00:55:41ZengKorean Association for the Study of Intestinal DiseasesIntestinal Research1598-91002288-19562019-07-0117341341810.5217/ir.2018.00156762Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE studyJeeyeon Kim0Hyun Gun Kim1Kyeong Ok Kim2Hyung Wook Kim3Jongha Park4Jeong-Sik Byeon5Sung-Wook Hwang6Hyun Deok Shin7Jeong Eun Shin8Hyo-Joon Yang9Hyun Seok Lee10Yunho Jung11Young-Seok Cho12Young Eun Joo13Dae-Seong Myung14Kyu Chan Huh15Eu Mi Ahn16 Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea Department of Gastroenterology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea Department of Internal Medicine, Konyang University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea Digestive Disease Center, Soonchunhyang University Hospital, Seoul, KoreaBackground/Aims This study compared the efficacy, compliance, and safety of bowel preparation between sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) and oral sulfate solution (OSS). Methods A prospective randomized multicenter study was performed. Split preparation methods were performed in both groups; the SPMC group, 2 sachets on the day before, and 1 sachet on the day of the procedure, the OSS group, half of the OSS with 1 L of water on both the day before and the day of the procedure. The adenoma detection rate (ADR), adequacy of bowel preparation using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, patient satisfaction on a visual analog scale (VAS), and safety were compared between the 2 groups. Results This study analyzed 229 patients (121 in the SPMC group and 108 in the OSS group). ADR showed no differences between 2 groups (51.7% vs. 41.7%, P>0.05). The mean total BBPS score (7.95 vs. 8.11, P>0.05) and adequate bowel preparation rate (94.9% vs. 96.3%, P>0.05) were similar between the 2 groups. The mean VAS score for taste (7.62 vs. 6.87, P=0.006) was significantly higher in the SPMC group than in the OSS group. There were no significant differences in any other safety variables between the 2 groups except nausea symptom (36.1% vs. 20.3%, P=0.008). Conclusions Bowel preparation for colonoscopy using low volume OSS and SPMC yielded similar ADRs and levels of efficacy. SPMC had higher levels of satisfaction for taste and feeling than did OSS.http://www.irjournal.org/upload/pdf/ir-2018-00156.pdfColonoscopyBowel preparationOral sulfate solutionSodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate |
| spellingShingle | Jeeyeon Kim Hyun Gun Kim Kyeong Ok Kim Hyung Wook Kim Jongha Park Jeong-Sik Byeon Sung-Wook Hwang Hyun Deok Shin Jeong Eun Shin Hyo-Joon Yang Hyun Seok Lee Yunho Jung Young-Seok Cho Young Eun Joo Dae-Seong Myung Kyu Chan Huh Eu Mi Ahn Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study Intestinal Research Colonoscopy Bowel preparation Oral sulfate solution Sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate |
| title | Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study |
| title_full | Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study |
| title_fullStr | Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study |
| title_short | Clinical comparison of low-volume agents (oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate) for bowel preparation: the EASE study |
| title_sort | clinical comparison of low volume agents oral sulfate solution and sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate for bowel preparation the ease study |
| topic | Colonoscopy Bowel preparation Oral sulfate solution Sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate |
| url | http://www.irjournal.org/upload/pdf/ir-2018-00156.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jeeyeonkim clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT hyungunkim clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT kyeongokkim clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT hyungwookkim clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT jonghapark clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT jeongsikbyeon clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT sungwookhwang clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT hyundeokshin clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT jeongeunshin clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT hyojoonyang clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT hyunseoklee clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT yunhojung clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT youngseokcho clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT youngeunjoo clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT daeseongmyung clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT kyuchanhuh clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy AT eumiahn clinicalcomparisonoflowvolumeagentsoralsulfatesolutionandsodiumpicosulfatewithmagnesiumcitrateforbowelpreparationtheeasestudy |