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
. 2021 Nov;33(7):1131-1138.
doi: 10.1111/den.13930. Epub 2021 Mar 9.

Efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution for bowel preparation in Japanese patients undergoing colonoscopy: Noninferiority-based, randomized, controlled study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution for bowel preparation in Japanese patients undergoing colonoscopy: Noninferiority-based, randomized, controlled study

Yutaka Saito et al. Dig Endosc. 2021 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution administered using the same-day dose and the split-dose regimens with those of polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate solution, used for bowel preparation in Japanese patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Methods: This multicenter (n = 13), randomized, active-controlled, colonoscopist- and image evaluator-blinded, noninferiority study with parallel-group comparison recruited 632 patients from December 2018 to June 2019. Of these, 602 patients were divided into the oral sulfate solution same-day dose group (n = 200); oral sulfate solution split-dose group (n = 202); and polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate same-day dose group (n = 200). Differences in the efficacy rates between the polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate group and each oral sulfate solution group were calculated using the asymptotic method. The safety of the oral sulfate solution was evaluated, based on the occurrence of adverse events and reactions.

Results: Both oral sulfate solution protocols were confirmed as noninferior to the polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate protocol for bowel-cleansing. The occurrence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in the oral sulfate solution same-day dose group than in the polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate group (P = 0.010). The occurrence of adverse reactions was not significantly different between the oral sulfate solution split-dose and the polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate group.

Conclusions: Oral sulfate solution is not only safe and efficacious but also not inferior to polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate solution (active control). It could be used for bowel preparation in Japanese patients scheduled for colonoscopy (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03794310).

Keywords: colonoscopy; human; oral sulfate solution; polyethylene glycol; sulfate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Nihon Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. contracted and paid all hospitals on the basis of good clinical practice. Author H. Tajiri has received consulting fees from Nihon Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Author S. Ichinose is an employee of Nihon Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The work was supported by Nihon Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of this study. *1 Discontinued from the study because the patient was using or had used a prohibited concomitant drug (n = 1). *2 Discontinued from the study because the patient was using or had used a prohibited concomitant drug (n = 4), faced an adverse event (n = 3), had difficulty continuing with the clinical study (n = 1), or withdrew consent (n = 3). *3 Discontinued from the study because the patient was using or had used a prohibited concomitant drug (n = 1), faced an adverse event (n = 2), or had difficulty continuing with the clinical study (n = 2).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers J‐J, Burnand B, Vader JP. Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 378–84. - PubMed
    1. Guo R, Wang Y‐J, Liu M et al. The effect of quality of segmental bowel preparation on adenoma detection rate. BMC Gastroenterol 2019; 19: 119. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH et al. A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a task force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 894–909. - PubMed
    1. Tanaka S, Kashida H, Saito Y et al. Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 219–39. - PubMed
    1. Ell C, Fischbach W, Keller R et al. A randomized, blinded, prospective trial to compare the safety and efficacy of three bowel‐cleansing solutions for colonoscopy (HSG‐01*). Endoscopy 2003; 35: 300–4. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data