Effectiveness of Sodium Picosulfate/Magnesium Citrate (PICO) for Colonoscopy Preparation.
- Author:
Ki Hwan SONG
1
;
Wu Seok SUH
;
Jin Sik JEONG
;
Dong Sik KIM
;
Sang Woo KIM
;
Dong Min KWAK
;
Jong Seong HWANG
;
Hyun Jin KIM
;
Man Woo PARK
;
Min Chul SHIM
;
Ja Il KOO
;
Jae Hwang KIM
;
Dae Ho SHON
Author Information
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords: Sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate; Satisfaction; Bowel preparation; Polyethylene glycols; Colonoscopy
- MeSH: Citric Acid*; Colon; Colonoscopy*; Humans; Nausea; Patient Satisfaction; Polyethylene Glycols; Secondary Care Centers; Sodium*; United States Food and Drug Administration; Surveys and Questionnaires
- From:Annals of Coloproctology 2014;30(5):222-227
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Bowel preparation with sodium phosphate was recently prohibited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is safe and effective; however, it is difficult to drink. To identify an easy bowel preparation method for colonoscopy, we evaluated three different bowel preparation regimens regarding their efficacy and patient satisfaction. METHODS: In this randomized, comparative study, 892 patients who visited a secondary referral hospital for a colonoscopy between November 2012 and February 2013 were enrolled. Three regimens were evaluated: three packets of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (PICO, group A), two packets of PICO with 1 L of PEG (PICO + PEG 1 L, group B), and two packets of PICO with 2 L of PEG (PICO + PEG 2 L, group C). A questionnaire survey regarding the patients' preference for the bowel preparation regimen and satisfaction was conducted before the colonoscopies. The quality of bowel cleansing was scored by the colonoscopists who used the Aronchick scoring scale and the Ottawa scale. RESULTS: The patients' satisfaction rate regarding the regimens were 72% in group A, 64% in group B, and 45.9% in group C. Nausea and abdominal bloating caused by the regimens were more frequent in group C than in group A or group B (P < 0.01). Group C showed the lowest preference rate compared to the other groups (P < 0.01). Group C showed better right colon cleansing efficacy than group A or group B. CONCLUSION: Group A exhibited a better result than group B or group C in patient satisfaction and preference. In the cleansing quality, no difference was noted between groups A and C.
