Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01531140

PEG Versus PEG+Bisacodyl Versus Sennosides for Colon Cleansing Before Colonoscopy

Background:

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution has been proven to be effective for large bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy in children. However, the high volume of fluid and its taste sometimes lead to inappropriate cleansing of the bowel, thus search for other bowel preparation is needed.

Aim:

The efficacy and tolerability of three different bowel cleansing protocols used in children for colonoscopy: high-volume PEG compared with low-volume PEG with stimulant laxative (bisacodyl) compared with sennosides.

Methods:

Participants aged 10-18 years will be randomly assigned to receive either PEG 60 ml/kg/day or PEG 30 ml/kg/day plus oral bisacodyl 10-15 mg/day or sennosides 2mg/kg/day for 2 days prior to the colonoscopy. The outcome measures will be:bowel cleansing efficacy, scored by a blinded endoscopist using the Ottawa scale and Aronchick Scale (the mean total score, proportions of participants with excellent/good and with poor/inadequate bowel preparation), and the patient satisfaction score(0-10)with the method of preparation for the colonoscopy evaluated with the visual analog scale. Analysis will be done on an intention to treat basis.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Colonoscopy Preparation

Age range

10 year–18 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Child Health Center, Warsaw, Poland

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Patients are excluded if they had known allergy to one of the tested preparations such as bisacodyl (Bisacodyl VP, ICN Polfa, Rzeszow, Poland), polyethylene glycol (Fortrans, Beaufour Ipsen Industry, Dreux, France) and/or sennoside (Xenna Extra, US Pharmacia, Wroclaw, Poland) and had disorders that make oral intake of the preparation impossible (neurological disorders, intestinal obstruction, mental retardation etc.).

Study design:

On admission day patients are allocated to one of the groups by study investigators, according to the randomization list created by an independent person using block randomization by a standard statistical program StatsDirect [version 2,3,8 (2005)] (6 patients were included in each block).

During the preparation for colonoscopy each patient are observed for procedure tolerance. On the day of endoscopy, each patient evaluated the degree of the acceptance of the method of bowel cleaning (according to visual analog scale (VAS) and the occurrence of side effects (diary). The endoscopist performing colonoscopy, blinded for the bowel preparation regimen evaluate bowel cleansing and score it, according to the Aronchick and Ottawa scale. The rate of cecum intubation, and the colonoscopy complications (defined as bowel perforation and/or significant bleeding) are analyzed in each bowel preparation group.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • children 10 - 18 years of age referred for colonoscopy
  • informed consent signed

Exclusion criteria

  • allergy to PEG, sennosides or bisacodyl
  • disorders that make oral intake of the preparation impossible (neurological disorders, intestinal obstruction, mental retardation etc.)

Treatment and study plan

polyethylene glycol +Bisacodyl

Drug

Polyethylene glycol (Fortrans) p.o. 30 ml/kg/2days + Bisacodyl p.o.10-15 mg/day for 2 days

Other names: Polyethylene glycol: Fortrans

Polyethylene glycol

Drug

Polyethylene glycol p.o.: 60 ml/kg/days

Other names: Polyethylene glycol: Fortrans

Sennosides

Drug

Sennosides 1tbl/8kg for 2 days

Other names: Sennosides: Xenna

Primary outcomes

  1. proportions of participants with good or excellent bowel preparation assessed with Ottawa Scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Ottawa scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to the Ottawa scale the quality of bowel preparation is estimated by adding points for the cleansing of three parts of colon (descending, transversal and ascending) and points for amount of fluid in the bowel. Score: 0-1 - excellent cleansing, 2-4 - good, 5-7 - sufficient, 8-10 - poor, 11-14 - not appropriate.

  2. proportions of participants with poor/inadequate bowel preparation assessed with Ottawa Scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Ottawa scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to the Ottawa scale the quality of bowel preparation is estimated by adding points for the cleansing of three parts of colon (descending, transversal and ascending) and points for amount of fluid in the bowel. Score: 0-1 - excellent cleansing, 2-4 - good, 5-7 - sufficient, 8-10 - poor, 11-14 - not appropriate.

Secondary outcomes

  1. proportions of participants with very good/good bowel preparation assessed with Aronchick Scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Aronchick scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to Aronchick scale preparation is estimated as:

    • very good: small amount of clear fluid is present, more than 95% mucosa is visible
    • good: small amount of clear fluid easy to suction away or flush is present, more than 90% of mucosa is visible
    • sufficient: big amount of clear fluid covering 5-25% of mucosa, more than 90% of mucosa visible
    • poor: semi-liquid stool that cannot be flushed, less than 90% of mucosa visible
    • inadequate: colonoscopy must be repeated

  2. proportions of participants with poor/inadequate bowel preparation assessed with Aronchick Scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Aronchick scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to Aronchick scale preparation is estimated as:

    • very good: small amount of clear fluid is present, more than 95% mucosa is visible
    • good: small amount of clear fluid easy to suction away or flush is present, more than 90% of mucosa is visible
    • sufficient: big amount of clear fluid covering 5-25% of mucosa, more than 90% of mucosa visible
    • poor: semi-liquid stool that cannot be flushed, less than 90% of mucosa visible
    • inadequate: colonoscopy must be repeated

  3. mean bowel preparation score assessed with Ottawa Scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Ottawa scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to the Ottawa scale the quality of bowel preparation is estimated by adding points for the cleansing of three parts of colon (descending, transversal and ascending) and points for amount of fluid in the bowel. Score: 0-1 - excellent cleansing, 2-4 - good, 5-7 - sufficient, 8-10 - poor, 11-14 - not appropriate.

  4. mean bowel preparation score assessed with Aronchick scale

    Time frame: bowel preparation quality with Aronchick scale is assesed during colonoscopy (3rd day of the study) by endoscopist blinded for the method of preparation

    According to Aronchick scale preparation is estimated as:

    • very good: small amount of clear fluid is present, more than 95% mucosa is visible
    • good: small amount of clear fluid easy to suction away or flush is present, more than 90% of mucosa is visible
    • sufficient: big amount of clear fluid covering 5-25% of mucosa, more than 90% of mucosa visible
    • poor: semi-liquid stool that cannot be flushed, less than 90% of mucosa visible
    • inadequate: colonoscopy must be repeated

  5. patient satisfaction with the method of preparation assessed with Visual analogue scale (VAS)

    Time frame: assessed by patient after completion of bowel preparation regimen before colonoscopy (3rd day of the study)

    VAS scale is horizontal line 100 mm lenght anchored by word description at each end (very good, very bad).The patient mark on the line the point that feel represent the perception of bowel preparation regimen.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Medical University of Warsaw

Other

Collaborators

  • Institute of Child Health

Registry information

Official study title

High-volume Polyethylene Glycol Solution (PEG) Versus Low-volume PEG Plus Stimulant Laxative Versus Sennosides for Colon Cleansing Before Colonoscopy: a Randomized, Single Blinded Study

Important dates

Study start
2010
Primary completion
2011
Study completion
2011
First posted
Feb 10, 2012
Registry last updated
Feb 10, 2012

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.