A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Background There are few data comparing U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Objective To compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (SP+MC) for bowel cleansing efficacy. Design Single-blind, randomized, con...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2014-12, Vol.80 (6), p.1113-1123 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1123 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1113 |
container_title | Gastrointestinal endoscopy |
container_volume | 80 |
creator | Rex, Douglas K., MD DiPalma, Jack A., MD McGowan, John, MPH Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD |
description | Background There are few data comparing U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Objective To compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (SP+MC) for bowel cleansing efficacy. Design Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Setting Ten U.S. centers. Patients Outpatients undergoing colonoscopy for routine indications. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo bowel preparation with OSS or SP+MC. Both preparations were given in split doses. Main Outcome Measurements Cleansing efficacy on a 4-point scale from excellent (4) to poor (1). Results Among 338 randomized patients who took preparation, OSS resulted in a higher rate of successful (excellent or good) preparation (94.7% vs 85.7%; P = .006) and more excellent preparations (54% vs 26%; P < .001) compared with SP+MC. There was no difference between OSS and SP+MC in treatment-emergent adverse events. SP+MC had better scores for nausea, but the differences were small. Limitations The preparation grading scale has been used in previous studies and has regulatory acceptance but has not been formally validated. Conclusion The U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved split-dose regimen of OSS provides superior bowel cleansing compared with the approved split-dose regimen of SP+MC. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01786629 .) |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1629586649</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0016510714018276</els_id><sourcerecordid>1629586649</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-1c500066dd89e16e23c98ce2a33f0cc20da1ba270edcfe98e6922c06304f48d73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAQxy0EokvhAbggH7lkGTuJk4CEVFV8SZU4AGfLa0-KFycOnqTVvgDP0Wfpk-FoFw4cOFm2_x-a3zD2XMBWgFCv9ttrj1sJotpCvS1l94BtBHRNoZqme8g2kEVFLaA5Y0-I9gDQylI8ZmeyBtnKptqwXxfcxmEyyVMceex5TCZwWkJvZuQUwzL7_HHr5-_55vwy8MnbeBK8vr8bzPWItL5bP6fV5EdOU_Azd5GQuCG-i7cY-JQw95g17_6ujykXhzhGsnE6PGWPehMIn53Oc_bt_buvlx-Lq88fPl1eXBW2atq5ELbOQyjlXNuhUChL27UWpSnLHqyV4IzYGdkAOttj16LqpLSgSqj6qnVNec5eHnOnFH8uSLMePFkMwYwYF9JCya5ulaq6LBVHqU2RKGGvp-QHkw5agF7x673O-PWKX0OtM_7seXGKX3YDur-OP7yz4M1RgHnIG49Jk_U4WnQ-oZ21i_6_8W__cdvgR29N-IEHpH1c0pjpaaFJatBf1v2v6xcViFyvyt9DQ68q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1629586649</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Rex, Douglas K., MD ; DiPalma, Jack A., MD ; McGowan, John, MPH ; Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Rex, Douglas K., MD ; DiPalma, Jack A., MD ; McGowan, John, MPH ; Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Background There are few data comparing U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Objective To compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (SP+MC) for bowel cleansing efficacy. Design Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Setting Ten U.S. centers. Patients Outpatients undergoing colonoscopy for routine indications. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo bowel preparation with OSS or SP+MC. Both preparations were given in split doses. Main Outcome Measurements Cleansing efficacy on a 4-point scale from excellent (4) to poor (1). Results Among 338 randomized patients who took preparation, OSS resulted in a higher rate of successful (excellent or good) preparation (94.7% vs 85.7%; P = .006) and more excellent preparations (54% vs 26%; P < .001) compared with SP+MC. There was no difference between OSS and SP+MC in treatment-emergent adverse events. SP+MC had better scores for nausea, but the differences were small. Limitations The preparation grading scale has been used in previous studies and has regulatory acceptance but has not been formally validated. Conclusion The U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved split-dose regimen of OSS provides superior bowel cleansing compared with the approved split-dose regimen of SP+MC. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01786629 .)</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-5107</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25028274</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cathartics - therapeutic use ; Citrates - therapeutic use ; Citric Acid - therapeutic use ; Colonoscopy - methods ; Female ; Gastroenterology and Hepatology ; Humans ; Magnesium Sulfate - therapeutic use ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Organometallic Compounds - therapeutic use ; Picolines - therapeutic use ; Single-Blind Method ; Sulfates - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2014-12, Vol.80 (6), p.1113-1123</ispartof><rights>American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>2014 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-1c500066dd89e16e23c98ce2a33f0cc20da1ba270edcfe98e6922c06304f48d73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-1c500066dd89e16e23c98ce2a33f0cc20da1ba270edcfe98e6922c06304f48d73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25028274$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rex, Douglas K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DiPalma, Jack A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGowan, John, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy</title><title>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</title><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><description>Background There are few data comparing U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Objective To compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (SP+MC) for bowel cleansing efficacy. Design Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Setting Ten U.S. centers. Patients Outpatients undergoing colonoscopy for routine indications. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo bowel preparation with OSS or SP+MC. Both preparations were given in split doses. Main Outcome Measurements Cleansing efficacy on a 4-point scale from excellent (4) to poor (1). Results Among 338 randomized patients who took preparation, OSS resulted in a higher rate of successful (excellent or good) preparation (94.7% vs 85.7%; P = .006) and more excellent preparations (54% vs 26%; P < .001) compared with SP+MC. There was no difference between OSS and SP+MC in treatment-emergent adverse events. SP+MC had better scores for nausea, but the differences were small. Limitations The preparation grading scale has been used in previous studies and has regulatory acceptance but has not been formally validated. Conclusion The U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved split-dose regimen of OSS provides superior bowel cleansing compared with the approved split-dose regimen of SP+MC. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01786629 .)</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cathartics - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Citrates - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Citric Acid - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnesium Sulfate - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Organometallic Compounds - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Picolines - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>Sulfates - therapeutic use</subject><issn>0016-5107</issn><issn>1097-6779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAQxy0EokvhAbggH7lkGTuJk4CEVFV8SZU4AGfLa0-KFycOnqTVvgDP0Wfpk-FoFw4cOFm2_x-a3zD2XMBWgFCv9ttrj1sJotpCvS1l94BtBHRNoZqme8g2kEVFLaA5Y0-I9gDQylI8ZmeyBtnKptqwXxfcxmEyyVMceex5TCZwWkJvZuQUwzL7_HHr5-_55vwy8MnbeBK8vr8bzPWItL5bP6fV5EdOU_Azd5GQuCG-i7cY-JQw95g17_6ujykXhzhGsnE6PGWPehMIn53Oc_bt_buvlx-Lq88fPl1eXBW2atq5ELbOQyjlXNuhUChL27UWpSnLHqyV4IzYGdkAOttj16LqpLSgSqj6qnVNec5eHnOnFH8uSLMePFkMwYwYF9JCya5ulaq6LBVHqU2RKGGvp-QHkw5agF7x673O-PWKX0OtM_7seXGKX3YDur-OP7yz4M1RgHnIG49Jk_U4WnQ-oZ21i_6_8W__cdvgR29N-IEHpH1c0pjpaaFJatBf1v2v6xcViFyvyt9DQ68q</recordid><startdate>20141201</startdate><enddate>20141201</enddate><creator>Rex, Douglas K., MD</creator><creator>DiPalma, Jack A., MD</creator><creator>McGowan, John, MPH</creator><creator>Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141201</creationdate><title>A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy</title><author>Rex, Douglas K., MD ; DiPalma, Jack A., MD ; McGowan, John, MPH ; Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c478t-1c500066dd89e16e23c98ce2a33f0cc20da1ba270edcfe98e6922c06304f48d73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cathartics - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Citrates - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Citric Acid - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnesium Sulfate - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Organometallic Compounds - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Picolines - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>Sulfates - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rex, Douglas K., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DiPalma, Jack A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGowan, John, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rex, Douglas K., MD</au><au>DiPalma, Jack A., MD</au><au>McGowan, John, MPH</au><au>Cleveland, Mark vB., PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy</atitle><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><date>2014-12-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1113</spage><epage>1123</epage><pages>1113-1123</pages><issn>0016-5107</issn><eissn>1097-6779</eissn><abstract>Background There are few data comparing U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Objective To compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with sodium picosulfate plus magnesium citrate (SP+MC) for bowel cleansing efficacy. Design Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Setting Ten U.S. centers. Patients Outpatients undergoing colonoscopy for routine indications. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo bowel preparation with OSS or SP+MC. Both preparations were given in split doses. Main Outcome Measurements Cleansing efficacy on a 4-point scale from excellent (4) to poor (1). Results Among 338 randomized patients who took preparation, OSS resulted in a higher rate of successful (excellent or good) preparation (94.7% vs 85.7%; P = .006) and more excellent preparations (54% vs 26%; P < .001) compared with SP+MC. There was no difference between OSS and SP+MC in treatment-emergent adverse events. SP+MC had better scores for nausea, but the differences were small. Limitations The preparation grading scale has been used in previous studies and has regulatory acceptance but has not been formally validated. Conclusion The U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved split-dose regimen of OSS provides superior bowel cleansing compared with the approved split-dose regimen of SP+MC. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01786629 .)</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25028274</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0016-5107 |
ispartof | Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2014-12, Vol.80 (6), p.1113-1123 |
issn | 0016-5107 1097-6779 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1629586649 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Aged Cathartics - therapeutic use Citrates - therapeutic use Citric Acid - therapeutic use Colonoscopy - methods Female Gastroenterology and Hepatology Humans Magnesium Sulfate - therapeutic use Male Middle Aged Organometallic Compounds - therapeutic use Picolines - therapeutic use Single-Blind Method Sulfates - therapeutic use |
title | A comparison of oral sulfate solution with sodium picosulfate: magnesium citrate in split doses as bowel preparation for colonoscopy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T08%3A40%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20oral%20sulfate%20solution%20with%20sodium%20picosulfate:%C2%A0magnesium%20citrate%20in%20split%20doses%20as%20bowel%20preparation%C2%A0for%20colonoscopy&rft.jtitle=Gastrointestinal%20endoscopy&rft.au=Rex,%20Douglas%20K.,%20MD&rft.date=2014-12-01&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1113&rft.epage=1123&rft.pages=1113-1123&rft.issn=0016-5107&rft.eissn=1097-6779&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.329&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1629586649%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1629586649&rft_id=info:pmid/25028274&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0016510714018276&rfr_iscdi=true |