Background And Aim:
The present study aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of low-volume oral sulfate solution (OSS) to 4-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions administered in a split-dose regimen as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The safety and tolerability were also compared between the two regimens.
Methods:
In this prospective, randomized, single-blind, active-control, parallel group, and non-inferiority trial, consecutive outpatients and health checkup recipients aged 19-65 years undergoing elective colonoscopy were enrolled to receive OSS or 4-L PEG in a split-dose regimen. The quality of bowel preparation was evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. The occurrence of any adverse events, acceptance, compliance, and satisfaction during bowel preparation were evaluated by participant interviews.
Results:
Overall, 210 participants were randomized, and 199 were administered by the study agents. Adequate bowel preparation was achieved in 98.0% (97/99) of the OSS group, which was non-inferior to the PEG group (96%; 96/100) with a difference of +2.8% (95% confidence interval; -2.8, +6.8). There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events except for abdominal pain, which was more frequent in the OSS (7.1%, 7/99) than in the PEG (1.0%, 1/100; P = 0.035) group. Acceptance, compliance, and satisfaction were significantly higher in the OSS than in the PEG group (all P < 0.05).
Conclusions:
Split-dose OSS was non-inferior to split-dose 4-L PEG with regard to bowel preparation efficacy before colonoscopy in adult outpatients or screening colonoscopy recipients aged ≤65 years with acceptable safety and superior tolerability.
Citing Articles
Efficacy of Oral Sulfate Tablet and 2 L-Polyethylene Glycol With Ascorbic Acid for Bowel Preparation: A Prospective Randomized KASID Multicenter Trial.
Jung Y, Kim H, Yang D, Kang H, Park J, Baek D
J Korean Med Sci. 2024; 39(48):e301.
PMID: 39688329
PMC: 11650332.
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e301.
Comparison of L L Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid and Oral Sodium Sulfate Tablets for Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation.
Park J, Kim M, Hong S, Hwang S, Park S, Yang D
J Clin Med. 2024; 13(23).
PMID: 39685949
PMC: 11642427.
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13237493.
Oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for bowel preparation before colonoscopy, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Liu X, Yu W, Liu J, Liu Q
Tech Coloproctol. 2024; 28(1):99.
PMID: 39138737
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-024-02981-9.
Evaluation of parameters influencing the quality of colon preparation with a split-dose regimen of sulfate salts.
Ioannou A, Axiaris G, Baxevanis P, Papathanasiou E, Tzakri M, Koumentakis C
Ann Gastroenterol. 2024; 37(2):172-178.
PMID: 38481779
PMC: 10927619.
DOI: 10.20524/aog.2024.0868.
Efficacy and safety of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparation in elderly: comparison with oral sulfate solution.
Lim K, Kim K, Kim E, Lee Y, Jang B, Kim S
Korean J Intern Med. 2023; 38(5):651-660.
PMID: 37482653
PMC: 10493436.
DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2023.030.
Cleaning effect and tolerance of 16 bowel preparation regimens on adult patients before colonoscopy: a network meta-analysis.
Sun M, Yang G, Wang Y
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2023; 38(1):69.
PMID: 36905434
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04355-3.
Oral Sulfate Solution Is as Effective as Polyethylene Glycol with Ascorbic Acid in a Split Method for Bowel Preparation in Patients with Inactive Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized, Multicenter, and Single-Blind Clinical Trial.
Lee J, Lee K, Kang H, Koo J, Lee H, Jeong S
Gut Liver. 2023; 17(4):591-599.
PMID: 36588527
PMC: 10352068.
DOI: 10.5009/gnl220202.
From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s.
Auriemma F, Sferrazza S, Bianchetti M, Savarese M, Lamonaca L, Paduano D
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2022; 14(7):632-655.
PMID: 36158280
PMC: 9353749.
DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v14.i7.632.
Oral sulfate solution benefits polyp and adenoma detection during colonoscopy: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Chen C, Shi M, Liao Z, Chen W, Wu Y, Tian X
Dig Endosc. 2022; 34(6):1121-1133.
PMID: 35294782
PMC: 9545996.
DOI: 10.1111/den.14299.
Efficacy and tolerability of high and low-volume bowel preparation compared: A real-life single-blinded large-population study.
Occhipinti V, Soriani P, Bagolini F, Milani V, Rondonotti E, Annunziata M
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2022; 13(12):659-672.
PMID: 35070027
PMC: 8716982.
DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v13.i12.659.
Novel frontiers of agents for bowel cleansing for colonoscopy.
Di Leo M, Iannone A, Arena M, Losurdo G, Palamara M, Iabichino G
World J Gastroenterol. 2021; 27(45):7748-7770.
PMID: 34963739
PMC: 8661374.
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i45.7748.
The importance of colonoscopy bowel preparation for the detection of colorectal lesions and colorectal cancer prevention.
Sharma P, Burke C, Johnson D, Cash B
Endosc Int Open. 2020; 8(5):E673-E683.
PMID: 32355887
PMC: 7165013.
DOI: 10.1055/a-1127-3144.
Update on Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy.
Rutherford C, Calderwood A
Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2018; 16(1):165-181.
PMID: 29404921
DOI: 10.1007/s11938-018-0165-3.
Predicting Suboptimal Bowel Preparation: Taking It Up a PEG.
Sahebally S
Dig Dis Sci. 2016; 62(2):289-291.
PMID: 27878647
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-016-4385-x.