A Comparison of Fleet(R) with Colonlyte(R) for Precolonoscopic Preparation.
- Author:
Jun Hyun BAEK
1
;
Hee Soo WEE
;
Dae Sung YOON
;
Jae Jung LEE
;
Chul Jae PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Bowel preparation;
Fleet(R);
Colonlyte(R)
- MeSH:
Abdominal Pain;
Body Weight;
Chest Pain;
Colon;
Dizziness;
Electrolytes;
Humans;
Hyperphosphatemia;
Incidence;
Nausea;
Polyethylene Glycols;
Prospective Studies;
Sodium;
Therapeutic Irrigation;
Vital Signs;
Vomiting
- From:Korean Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
1997;17(4):494-500
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recent reports have suggested that precolonoscopy bowel preparation is easier to tolerate if a small volume solution is used. The aim of this study was to compare oral sodium phosphate with polyethylene glycol solution in terms of the quality of colon cleansing, ease of preparation, and gastrointestinal intolerance. METHODS: Sixty one patients were prospectively randomized to receive either a standard 4-liter polyethylene glycol solution or a 90 ml oral sodium phosphate preparation. Before and after bowel preparation all patients were weighted, and serum electrolytes were measured. Patients were asked to record the effects of the preparation and to give it a "discomfort rating" on a scale from 1 to 5. Surgeons were blinded to the preparation used and rated the quality of bowel cleansing on a scale of 1 to 5. RESULTS: The smaller volume of oral sodium phosphate was not associated with any clinically significant problem,caused no increase in the incidence of side effects, was preferred by patients, and was effective in colonic cleansing. The incidence of sleep disturbance, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, anal discomfort, chest pain, chilling and dizziness associated with oral sodium phosphate was similar to that with polyethylene glycol lavage. Abdominal distension was more common with polyethylene glycol lavage and statistical difference was seen(P<0.01). There were no clinically significant changes in any biochemical parameters and vital signs caused by precolonoscopic preparation except asymptomatic hyperphosphatemia in the sodium phosphate group that was not statistically different. The decreased body weight was seen with Colonlyte(R) that was statistically different(P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The overall quality of bowel preparation with oral sodium phosphate was similar to that with polyethylene glycol lavage. Patients tolerated preparation with oral sodium phosphate to be somewhat easier than polyethylene glycol lavage. Therefore, we conclude that the use of oral sodium phosphate as a precolonoscopy bowel preparation is clinically useful.
