Background and Aim: The intake of polyethylene glycol (PEG) prior colonoscopy is frequently associated with nausea and abdominal discomfort. The aim of this study was to investigate whether sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (PMC) is superior to a polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation in regard to patient acceptance. Furthermore, it investigates possible differences in efficiency and patient safety. Methods: In a randomised, prospective, and endoscopist-blinded study patients were 1:1 randomized to either use PMC or 4-L PEG in order to prepare for colonoscopy. Cleansing regimes consisted of a split-dose administration in the PEG arm and standard administration in the PMC arm. Primary end point was proportion of patients evaluating the bowel preparation procedure as "very distressing," defined as ≥ 8 points on a 10-point numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary end points were quality of bowel preparation and electrolyte parameters. Results: PMC bowel-cleansing procedure was better tolerated compared with PEG (PMC NRS<8 = 89.9% vs PEG NRS<8 = 79.2%, P = 0.037). Mean declines in serum sodium (ΔSodium PEG = −0.76 ± 3.07 vs ΔSodium PMC = −3.38 ± 3.56 mmol/L; P < 0.001), chloride (ΔChloride PEG = −1.00 ± 3.22 vs ΔChloride PMC = −3.49 ± 3.51 mmol/L; P < 0.001), and osmolality (ΔOsmolality PEG = −4.23 ± 6.82 vs ΔOsmolality PMC = −8.83 ± 7.43 mosmol/kg; P < 0.001) were higher in the PMC arm than in the PEG arm. Hyponatremia after bowel preparation occurred more often in PMC (21.2%) than in PEG (4.0%) (P < 0.001). Successful preparation was achieved more frequently in the PEG arm (42.9% vs 82.2%; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Standard picosulfate/magnesium citrate is better accepted than a split-dose PEG regimen. From the perspective of successful preparation and patients' safety, PEG is superior to PMC.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.