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
. 2022 Aug;36(8):5724-5733.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08947-4. Epub 2022 Jan 15.

1 L- versus 2 L-polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid for bowel preparation in elderly patients: a randomized multicenter study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

1 L- versus 2 L-polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid for bowel preparation in elderly patients: a randomized multicenter study

Jin Young Yoon et al. Surg Endosc. 2022 Aug.

Abstract

Background: 1 L-polyethylene glycol (PEG)/ascorbic acid (Asc) was developed to reduce the required oral preparation volume through increasing osmotic load through containing a greater quantity of ascorbate components. We aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of a split-dosing regimen of 1 L-PEG/Asc versus 2 L-PEG/Asc in elderly patients undergoing scheduled colonoscopy.

Methods: This was a prospective, non-inferiority, randomized, investigator-blinded multicenter study conducted in Korea between July 2019 and December 2020. Patients aged between 65 and 85 years were randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to either the 1 L-PEG/Asc or 2 L-PEG/Asc group. The efficacy of the bowel preparation was evaluated using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS) and the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).

Results: A total of 202 patients were analyzed. Successful overall bowel preparation was similar between the 1 L-PEG/Asc and 2 L-PEG/Asc groups based on HCS (95.1% vs. 93.1%, P = 0.528) and BBPS (93.1% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.422). The perfect overall bowel preparation rate in the 1 L-PEG/Asc group was higher than that in the 2 L-PEG/Asc group (HCS, 40.2% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.021; BBPS, 80.4% vs. 68.0%, P = 0.044). There were more high-quality bowel preparations for the right colon in the 1 L-PEG/Asc group (HCS, 46.1% vs. 30.0%, P = 0.019; BBPS, 83.3% vs. 70.0%, P = 0.025). The adenoma detection rate (47.1% vs. 49.0%, P = 0.782), rate of adverse events (25.5% vs. 23.0%, P = 0.680), shifts in laboratory results, and tolerability were comparable between the groups.

Conclusion: 1 L-PEG/Asc was as effective, safe, and tolerable as 2 L-PEG/Asc in elderly patients with comorbidities.

Keywords: Ascorbic acid; Bowel preparation; Elderly; Polyethylene glycol.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead P, Morikawa T, Liao X, Qian ZR, Inamura K, Kim SA, Kuchiba A, Yamauchi M, Imamura Y, Willett WC, Rosner BA, Fuchs CS, Giovannucci E, Ogino S, Chan AT (2013) Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med 369:1095–1105 - DOI
    1. Loberg M, Kalager M, Holme O, Hoff G, Adami HO, Bretthauer M (2014) Long-term colorectal-cancer mortality after adenoma removal. N Engl J Med 371:799–807 - DOI
    1. Cha JM, Kozarek RA, La Selva D, Gluck M, Ross A, Chiorean M, Koch J, Lin OS (2016) Risks and benefits of colonoscopy in patients 90 years or older, compared with younger patients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 14:80–86;e81
    1. Hassan C, Fuccio L, Bruno M, Pagano N, Spada C, Carrara S, Giordanino C, Rondonotti E, Curcio G, Dulbecco P, Fabbri C, Della Casa D, Maiero S, Simone A, Iacopini F, Feliciangeli G, Manes G, Rinaldi A, Zullo A, Rogai F, Repici A (2012) A predictive model identifies patients most likely to have inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 10:501–506 - DOI
    1. Cohen LB, Sanyal SM, Von Althann C, Bodian C, Whitson M, Bamji N, Miller KM, Mavronicolas W, Burd S, Freedman J, Aisenberg J (2010) Clinical trial: 2-L polyethylene glycol-based lavage solutions for colonoscopy preparation—a randomized, single-blind study of two formulations. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 32:637–644 - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources