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
. 2020 Jul;35(4):873-880.
doi: 10.3904/kjim.2017.275. Epub 2019 Jan 30.

A prospective randomized clinical study evaluating the efficacy and compliance of oral sulfate solution and 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A prospective randomized clinical study evaluating the efficacy and compliance of oral sulfate solution and 2-L ascorbic acid plus polyethylene glycol

Ki Hwan Kwon et al. Korean J Intern Med. 2020 Jul.

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This research was supported by research fund of M.H. Healthcare.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. 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
    1. 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
    1. Landreneau SW, Di Palma JA. Update on preparation for colonoscopy. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2010;12:366–373. - PubMed
    1. Parra-Blanco A, Ruiz A, Alvarez-Lobos M, et al. Achieving the best bowel preparation for colonoscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:17709–17726. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK. Guidelines for an optimum screening colonoscopy. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep. 2012;8:6–15.

Publication types