Sodium Picosulfate with Magnesium Citrate (SPMC) Plus Laxative Is a Good Alternative to Conventional Large Volume Polyethylene Glycol in Bowel Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Single-Blinded Trial.
- Author:
Hyun Gun KIM
1
;
Kyu Chan HUH
;
Hoon Sup KOO
;
Seong Eun KIM
;
Jin Oh KIM
;
Tae Il KIM
;
Hyun Soo KIM
;
Seung Jae MYUNG
;
Dong Il PARK
;
Jeong Eun SHIN
;
Dong Hoon YANG
;
Suck Ho LEE
;
Ji Sung LEE
;
Chang Kyun LEE
;
Dong Kyung CHANG
;
Young Eun JOO
;
Jae Myung CHA
;
Sung Pil HONG
;
Hyo Jong KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Comparative Study ; Multicenter Study ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Keywords: Colonoscopy; Bowel preparation; Sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate; Polyethylene glycols
- MeSH: Adult; Aged; Cathartics/*administration & dosage; Citrates/*administration & dosage; Citric Acid/*administration & dosage; Colon/*drug effects/surgery; *Colonoscopy; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination/methods; Female; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Laxatives/*administration & dosage; Male; Middle Aged; Organometallic Compounds/*administration & dosage; Patient Compliance; Patient Satisfaction; Picolines/*administration & dosage; Polyethylene Glycols/*administration & dosage; Preoperative Care/methods/psychology; Single-Blind Method; Young Adult
- From:Gut and Liver 2015;9(4):494-501
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: BACKGROUND/AIMS: We investigated whether sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) plus bisacodyl compares favorably with conventional polyethylene glycol (PEG) with respect to bowel cleansing adequacy, compliance, and safety. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, prospective, single-blinded study in outpatients undergoing daytime colonoscopies. Patients were randomized into a split preparation SPMC/bisacodyl group and a conventional split PEG group. We compared preparation adequacy using the Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS), ease of use using a modified Likert scale (LS), compliance/satisfaction level using a visual analogue scale (VAS), and safety by monitoring adverse events during the colonoscopy between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 365 patients were evaluated by intention to treat (ITT) analysis, and 319 were evaluated by per protocol (PP) population analysis (153 for SPMC/bisacodyl, 166 for PEG). The mean total BBPS score was not different between the two groups in both the ITT and PP analyses (p>0.05). The mean VAS score for satisfaction and LS score for the ease of use were higher in the SPMC/bisacodyl group (p<0.001). The adverse event rate was lower in the SPMC/bisacodyl group than in the PEG group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The SPMC/bisacodyl treatment was comparable to conventional PEG with respect to bowel preparation adequacy and superior with respect to compliance, satisfaction, and safety.
