Oral Sulfate Solution versus Polyethylene Glycol as a Single-Day Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Randomized Control Trial

Abstract

Background Colonoscopy is a principal diagnostic tool for most colonic disorders. Adequate bowel preparation is essential for proper visualization of the mucosa. The aim of this study was to compare the tolerability, efficacy, and safety profile of 1 L of oral sulfate solution (OSS) in comparison to 2 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution.

Methods In this single-center prospective study conducted at our institute, patients were randomly assigned to receive either OSS or PEG solutions for colonoscopy preparation. Patients enrolled in either group completed a questionnaire assessing the taste of the solution used, adverse effects, and number of stools passed. Grading of the bowel cleansing quality was done as per Boston Bowel Preparation (BBP) score.

Results Total of 400 patients, with 222 patients in the PEG group and 178 patients in the OSS group, were assessed. In the PEG group, 148 (66.75%) patients were males and in the OSS group 112 (62.9%) patients were males. There was no statistical significance on comparison of the taste as “good” or “bad” in both groups. All the adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity and their frequencies were comparable for both the groups. The OSS group had better bowel preparation as per the BBP score (p = 0.021) and lesser cecal intubation time (p = 0.028).

Conclusion The present study demonstrated that 1 L of OSS is better than the well-established 2 L PEG solution, in terms of bowel preparation and shorter time to cecal intubation.

Keywords

colonoscopy preparation - oral sulfate solution - polyethylene glycol

• References

• 1 Kim WH, Cho YJ, Park JY, Min PK, Kang JK, Park IS. Factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 52 (05) 600-605
• 2 Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR, Bratcher LL. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97 (07) 1696-1700
• 3 Davis GR, Santa Ana CA, Morawski SG, Fordtran JS. Development of a lavage solution associated with minimal water and electrolyte absorption or secretion. Gastroenterology 1980; 78 (5 Pt 1) 991-995
• 4 Beck DE, Harford FJ, DiPalma JA. Brady CE III. Bowel cleansing with polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution. South Med J 1985; 78 (12) 1414-1416
• 5 Thomas G, Brozinsky S, Isenberg JI. Patient acceptance and effectiveness of a balanced lavage solution (Golytely) versus the standard preparation for colonoscopy. Gastroenterology 1982; 82 (03) 435-437
• 6 DiPiro JT, Michael KA, Clark BA. et al. Absorption of polyethylene glycol after administration of a PEG-electrolyte lavage solution. Clin Pharm 1986; 5 (02) 153-155
• 7 Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland Mv. A randomized clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new, reduced-volume, oral sulfate colon-cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104 (09) 2275-2284
• 8 Patel V, Nicar M, Emmett M. et al. Intestinal and renal effects of low-volume phosphate and sulfate cathartic solutions designed for cleansing the colon: pathophysiological studies in five normal subjects. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104 (04) 953-965
• 9 Pelham RW, Russell RG, Padgett EL, Reno FE, Cleveland Mv. Safety of oral sulfates in rats and dogs contrasted with phosphate-induced nephropathy in rats. Int J Toxicol 2009; 28 (02) 99-112
• 10 Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69 (3 Pt 2) 620-625
• 11 Calderwood AH, Jacobson BC. Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72 (04) 686-692
• 12 Gao Y, Lin JS, Zhang HD, Lin MX, Cheng CS, Wu SZ. Pilot validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale in China. Dig Endosc 2013; 25 (02) 167-173
• 13 Calderwood AH, Schroy III PC. Lieberman DA, Logan JR, Zurfluh M, Jacobson BC. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores provide a standardized definition of adequate for describing bowel cleanliness. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80 (02) 269-276
• 14 Sulz MC, Kröger A, Prakash M, Manser CN, Heinrich H, Misselwitz B. Meta-analysis of the effect of bowel preparation on adenoma detection: early adenomas affected stronger than advanced adenomas. PLoS One 2016; 11 (06) e0154149
• 15 Rex DK, Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland M. A randomized clinical study comparing reduced-volume oral sulfate solution with standard 4-liter sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution as preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72 (02) 328-336
• 16 Rex DK, DiPalma JA, McGowan J, Cleveland Mv. A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80 (06) 1113-1123
• 17 Joshi V, Jain M, Srinivas M. et al. Bowel cleansing agents in clinical practice: a cross-sectional study on safety, efficacy, and predictor of good bowel preparation. J Dig Endosc. 2019; 10 (01) 39