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
Clinical Trial
. 1998 Sep;93(9):1478-82.
doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00467.x.

Comparison of two bowel preparations for colonoscopy: sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate versus sulphate-free polyethylene glycol lavage solution

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Comparison of two bowel preparations for colonoscopy: sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate versus sulphate-free polyethylene glycol lavage solution

A Regev et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998 Sep.

Abstract

Objectives: Adequate preparation of the bowel is essential for accurate colonoscopic examination. We compared colonic preparation with sodium picosulphate plus magnesium citrate (SPS-Mg) with sulphate-free polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage (PEG-EL) solution before colonoscopy, for quality of bowel cleansing, patient discomfort, and side effects.

Methods: Sixty-eight consecutive patients were randomly assigned to receive either 3 sachets of SPS-Mg (16.5 g each) (n = 39) or 3 L of PEG-EL (n = 29) on the day before colonoscopy. Shortly before the procedure each patient was interviewed to determine the degree of discomfort (1 = none or mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) and side effects. The quality of bowel cleansing was graded by a gastroenterologist who was unaware of the method of preparation (from 1 = poor to 4 = excellent).

Results: Of the 29 PEG-EL patients, four (14%) did not complete the preparation because of side effects. The degree of discomfort was significantly greater with PEG-EL (mean score, 2.3 +/- 0.7) than with SPS-Mg (mean score, 1.4 +/- 0.5; p < 0.01). Nausea and vomiting were significantly more common in the PEG-EL group (38% vs 13%; p < 0.05). Using intention-to-treat analysis, bowel cleansing proved to be significantly better with SPS-Mg than with PEG-EL (mean score +/- SD, 3.05 +/- 0.9 and 2.57 +/- 1.0, respectively; p = 0.036).

Conclusions: Colonic preparation with SPS-Mg is better tolerated, associated with significantly fewer side effects, and results in higher quality bowel cleansing than preparation with PEG-EL.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types