Gut and Liver

The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver (대한간학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparison of 2 L of Polyethylene Glycol and 45 mL of Sodium Phosphate versus 4 L of Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Cleansing: A Prospective Randomized Trial

  • Bae, Suh Eun (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Kyung-Jo (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Eum, Jun Bum (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Yang, Dong Hoon (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Ye, Byong Duk (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Byeon, Jeong-Sik (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Myung, Seung-Jae (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Yang, Suk-Kyun (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Ho (Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
  • Published : 2013.07.15
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background/Aims: Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-based gut lavage solutions are safe and effective, but require the intake of large volumes of fluid. The use of 2 L PEG plus 45 mL sodium phosphate (PEG2 plus NaP) was compared with 4 L PEG (PEG4) for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Methods: Patients were randomized to the PEG2 plus NaP group or PEG4 group between January 1, 2009 and March 31, 2010. One hundred and thirty patients were included in the PEG2 plus NaP group, and 141 patients in the PEG4 group. Results: The qualities of the bowel preparation, based on the Ottawa scale were not significantly different between the groups ($4.8{\pm}2.25$ for the PEG2 plus NaP group vs. $5.11{\pm}2.26$ for the PEG4). In addition, there were no significant differences in side effects. Laboratory findings after bowel preparation, including electrolyte, phosphorus and creatinine levels, were within the normal ranges in both groups. Conclusions: PEG2 plus NaP provides good cleansing that is similar to PEG4, but with a lower volume. However, because PEG2 plus NaP can cause serious side effects such as calcium deposition in the kidneys (i.e., nephrocalcinosis), this solution might be considered for the outpatients who cannot tolerate PEG4.

Keywords

References

  1. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers JJ, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:378-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02776-2
  2. Huppertz-Hauss G, Bretthauer M, Sauar J, et al. Polyethylene glycol versus sodium phosphate in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Endoscopy 2005;37:537-541. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-861315
  3. Lapalus MG, Ben Soussan E, Saurin JC, et al. Capsule endoscopy and bowel preparation with oral sodium phosphate: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2008;67:1091-1096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2007.11.053
  4. Hsu CW, Imperiale TF. Meta-analysis and cost comparison of polyethylene glycol lavage versus sodium phosphate for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc 1998;48:276-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(98)70191-9
  5. Juluri R, Eckert G, Imperiale TF. Meta-analysis: randomized controlled trials of 4-L polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate solution as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010;32:171-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04326.x
  6. Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbach D. Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007;25:373-384.
  7. Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH, et al. A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a task force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Gastrointest Endosc 2006;63:894-909.
  8. Belsey J, Epstein O, Heresbach D. Systematic review: adverse event reports for oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2009;29:15-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03837.x
  9. Hookey LC, Depew WT, Vanner S. The safety profile of oral sodium phosphate for colonic cleansing before colonoscopy in adults. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:895-902. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(02)70367-2
  10. Park JS, Sohn CI, Hwang SJ, et al. Quality and effect of single dose versus split dose of polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for early-morning colonoscopy. Endoscopy 2007;39:616-619. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-966434
  11. Ell C, Fischbach W, Bronisch HJ, et al. Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:883-893. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01708.x
  12. Rostom A, Jolicoeur E. Validation of a new scale for the assessment of bowel preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:482-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(03)02875-X
  13. Park SS, Sinn DH, Kim YH, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of split-dose magnesium citrate: low-volume (2 liters) polyethylene glycol vs. single- or split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation for morning colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105:1319-1326. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2010.79
  14. Bitoun A, Ponchon T, Barthet M, et al. Results of a prospective randomised multicentre controlled trial comparing a new 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol and electrolyte solution vs. sodium phosphate solution in patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;24:1631-1642. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03167.x
  15. Adams WJ, Meagher AP, Lubowski DZ, King DW. Bisacodyl reduces the volume of polyethylene glycol solution required for bowel preparation. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:229-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02048160
  16. Lee JW, Kim NY, Cha BH, et al. Comparison between conventional 4 L polyethylene glycol and combination of 2 L polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate solution as colonoscopy preparation. Korean J Gastroenterol 2010;56:299-306. https://doi.org/10.4166/kjg.2010.56.5.299
  17. Siddiqui AA, Yang K, Spechler SJ, et al. Duration of the interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy predicts bowel-preparation quality. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69(3 Pt 2):700-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.047
  18. Yoon JH, Park DI, Shin JE, et al. Comparison of bowel preparation depending on completion time of polyethylene glycol ingestion and start time of colonoscopy. Intest Res 2010;8:24-29. https://doi.org/10.5217/ir.2010.8.1.24
  19. Gonlusen G, Akgun H, Ertan A, Olivero J, Truong LD. Renal failure and nephrocalcinosis associated with oral sodium phosphate bowel cleansing: clinical patterns and renal biopsy findings. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:101-106.
  20. Markowitz GS, Nasr SH, Klein P, et al. Renal failure due to acute nephrocalcinosis following oral sodium phosphate bowel cleansing. Hum Pathol 2004;35:675-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2003.12.005
  21. Rex DK, Vanner SJ. Colon cleansing before colonoscopy: does oral sodium phosphate solution still make sense? Can J Gastroenterol 2009;23:210-214. https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/417296

Cited by

  1. Withdrawal time in excellent or very poor bowel preparation qualities vol.6, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v6.i5.186
  2. Renal risk associated with sodium phosphate medication: safe in healthy individuals, potentially dangerous in others vol.14, pp.7, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1517/14740338.2015.1044970
  3. Sodium phosphate versus polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy bowel preparation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials vol.30, pp.9, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4716-6
  4. Combination could be another tool for bowel preparation? vol.22, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i10.2915
  5. Does Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Plus Ascorbic Acid Induce More Mucosal Injuries than Split-Dose 4-L PEG during Bowel Preparation? vol.10, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl14439
  6. Low Volume Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Plus Ascorbic Acid, a Valid Alternative to Standard PEG vol.10, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl15659
  7. Comparable Efficacy of a 1-L PEG and Ascorbic Acid Solution Administered with Bisacodyl versus a 2-L PEG and Ascorbic Acid Solution for Colonoscopy Preparation: A Prospective, Randomized and Investiga vol.11, pp.9, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162051
  8. Addition of Lubiprostone to polyethylene glycol(PEG) enhances the quality & efficacy of colonoscopy preparation: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial vol.16, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-016-0542-0
  9. A Randomized Trial of Split Dose 3 L Polyethylene Glycol Lavage Solution, 2 L Polyethylene Glycol Lavage Combined With Castor Oil, and 1 L of Polyethylene Glycol Lavage Solution Combined With Castor O vol.6, pp.None, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2019.00158