A prospective randomized clinical study evaluating the efficacy and compliance of oral sulfate solution and 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol
- PMID: 30685963
- PMCID: PMC7373964
- DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2017.275
A prospective randomized clinical study evaluating the efficacy and compliance of oral sulfate solution and 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol
Abstract
Background/aims: Oral sulfate solution (OSS) is an emerging cleansing agent for bowel preparation. However, data comparing OSS to other conventional bowel preparations in Asian patients are limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of OSS to ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol (AA + PEG) in Asian patients.
Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, parallel, investigator-blind study performed in two university hospitals in Korea. Bowel preparation efficacy was evaluated using both the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS) and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).
Results: Among 173 patients, 86 received OSS while 87 received AA + PEG for bowel preparation. Total OBPS score was 2.80 ± 2.48 in the OSS group and 4.49 ± 3.08 in the AA + PEG group, indicating significantly (p < 0.001) better efficacy with OSS. Total BBPS was higher in the OSS group (7.43 ± 1.49 vs. 6.51 ± 1.76, p < 0.001), indicating superior bowel preparation quality with OSS. Preparation-related adverse events were generally acceptable. Patients receiving OSS had more nausea (1.92 ± 0.94 vs. 1.54 ± 0.76, p = 0.004) and abdominal cramping (1.45 ± 0.78 vs. 1.17 ± 0.51, p = 0.006) than those receiving AA + PEG. However, overall satisfaction and taste were similar between the two groups.
Conclusion: OSS had a non-inferior bowel cleansing efficacy than AA + PEG regardless of colon segment.
Keywords: Ascorbic acid; Bowel preparation; Colonoscopy; Oral sulfate solution; Polyethylene glycols.
Conflict of interest statement
This research was supported by research fund of M.H. Healthcare.
Similar articles
-
Evaluation of the efficacy of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid and an oral sodium sulfate solution: A multi-center, prospective randomized controlled trial.Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Sep 2;101(35):e30355. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030355. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022. PMID: 36107563 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.DEN Open. 2025 Apr 16;5(1):e70113. doi: 10.1002/deo2.70113. eCollection 2025 Apr. DEN Open. 2025. PMID: 40248440 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Efficacy and safety of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparation in elderly: comparison with oral sulfate solution.Korean J Intern Med. 2023 Sep;38(5):651-660. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2023.030. Epub 2023 Jul 24. Korean J Intern Med. 2023. PMID: 37482653 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
A randomized, controlled trial of oral sulfate solution plus polyethylene glycol as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy.Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Sep;80(3):482-91. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.03.043. Epub 2014 May 13. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014. PMID: 24830577 Clinical Trial.
-
Oral sulfate solution versus low-volume polyethylene glycol for bowel preparation: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Dig Endosc. 2022 May;34(4):721-728. doi: 10.1111/den.14194. Epub 2021 Dec 13. Dig Endosc. 2022. PMID: 34784082 Review.
Cited by
-
Efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution for bowel preparation in Japanese patients undergoing colonoscopy: Noninferiority-based, randomized, controlled study.Dig Endosc. 2021 Nov;33(7):1131-1138. doi: 10.1111/den.13930. Epub 2021 Mar 9. Dig Endosc. 2021. PMID: 33476415 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for bowel preparation before colonoscopy, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.Tech Coloproctol. 2024 Aug 13;28(1):99. doi: 10.1007/s10151-024-02981-9. Tech Coloproctol. 2024. PMID: 39138737
-
Evaluation of the efficacy of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid and an oral sodium sulfate solution: A multi-center, prospective randomized controlled trial.Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Sep 2;101(35):e30355. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030355. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022. PMID: 36107563 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Oral sulfate solution benefits polyp and adenoma detection during colonoscopy: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Dig Endosc. 2022 Sep;34(6):1121-1133. doi: 10.1111/den.14299. Epub 2022 Apr 6. Dig Endosc. 2022. PMID: 35294782 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.DEN Open. 2025 Apr 16;5(1):e70113. doi: 10.1002/deo2.70113. eCollection 2025 Apr. DEN Open. 2025. PMID: 40248440 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Dakkak M, Aziz K, Bennett JR. Short report: comparison of two orally administered bowel preparations for colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol and sodium picosulphate. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1992;6:513–519. - PubMed
-
- Hamilton D, Mulcahy D, Walsh D, et al. Sodium picosulphate compared with polyethylene glycol solution for large bowel lavage: a prospective randomised trial. Br J Clin Pract. 1996;50:73–75. - PubMed
-
- Landreneau SW, Di Palma JA. Update on preparation for colonoscopy. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2010;12:366–373. - PubMed
-
- Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK. Guidelines for an optimum screening colonoscopy. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep. 2012;8:6–15.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical