Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Sep 14;12(34):5536-9.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i34.5536.

Comparative study of two bowel preparation regimens for colonoscopy: senna tablets vs sodium phosphate solution

Savit Kositchaiwat  1 , Weerapat Suwanthanmma, Ronnarat Suvikapakornkul, Vaewvadee Tiewthanom, Prisna Rerkpatanakit, Chaowalitr Tinkornrusmee
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparative study of two bowel preparation regimens for colonoscopy: senna tablets vs sodium phosphate solution

Savit Kositchaiwat et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To compare the efficacy and acceptance of senna tablet and sodium phosphate solution for bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

Methods: One hundred and thirty four patients, who needed elective colonoscopy, were randomly allocated to take 180 mg senna tablet or 95 mL sodium phosphate solution on the day before colonoscopy. The efficacies of both laxatives were compared using the mean difference of colon-cleanliness score of the rectum, sigmoid segments, descending colon, transverse colon and cecum. The scores were rated by two observers who were blinded to the laxatives administered. The higher score means that the colon is cleaner. The efficacy of both laxatives were equivalent if the 95% confidence interval of the mean difference of the score of colon lie within -1 to +1.

Results: On intention-to-treat analysis, the mean cleanliness scores in the four segments of colon except the cecum were higher in the sodium phosphate group than those in senna group (7.9 +/- 1.7 vs 8.3 +/- 1.5, 8.0 +/- 1.8 vs 8.5 +/- 1.4, 7.9 +/- 2.0 vs 8.5 +/- 1.3, 7.9 +/- 2.0 vs 8.2 +/- 1.4 and 7.2 +/- 1.7 vs 6.9 +/- 1.4, respectively). The 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of mean difference in each segment of colon were not found to lie within 1 point which indicated that their efficacies were not equivalent. The taste of senna was better than sodium phosphate solution. Also, senna had fewer side effects.

Conclusion: The efficacy of senna is not equivalent to sodium phosphate solution in bowel preparation for colonoscopy, but senna may be considered an alternative laxative.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of patients progress through the phases of a randomized trial.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rex DK, Imperiale TF, Latinovich DR, Bratcher LL. Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:1696–1700. - PubMed
    1. Ness RM, Manam R, Hoen H, Chalasani N. Predictors of inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:1797–1802. - PubMed
    1. Vanner SJ, MacDonald PH, Paterson WG, Prentice RS, Da Costa LR, Beck IT. A randomized prospective trial comparing oral sodium phosphate with standard polyethylene glycol-based lavage solution (Golytely) in the preparation of patients for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;85:422–427. - PubMed
    1. Kolts BE, Lyles WE, Achem SR, Burton L, Geller AJ, MacMath T. A comparison of the effectiveness and patient tolerance of oral sodium phosphate, castor oil, and standard electrolyte lavage for colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy preparation. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:1218–1223. - PubMed
    1. Cohen SM, Wexner SD, Binderow SR, Nogueras JJ, Daniel N, Ehrenpreis ED, Jensen J, Bonner GF, Ruderman WB. Prospective, randomized, endoscopic-blinded trial comparing precolonoscopy bowel cleansing methods. Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;37:689–696. - PubMed

Publication types