Colonoscopy PreparationPhase 4REPREP1NCT02073552
Colon Cleansing Quality of Polyethylene Glycol Compared With Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid.
A Phase 4 study testing Polyethylene glycol 4000 and Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid in people with Colonoscopy Preparation, run by Fundación Canaria Rafael Clavijo para la Investigación Biomédica at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
The purpose of the study is to assess whether a low volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid based bowel preparation for colonoscopy is not inferior to a large volume polyethylene glycol preparation in subjects with past history of poor bowel preparation Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Colonoscopy Preparation
- What is being tested?
- Polyethylene glycol 4000 and Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 472 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- May 2014to May 2016
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age> 18 years
- Outpatients with a history of past poor bowel prep, defined according to the Boston scale as a score less than 5.
- Signed informed consent
Who cannot join
- paralytic ileus, intestinal obstruction, megacolon, poorly controlled hypertension (systolic pressure> 180, dyastolic pressure> 100), congestive heart failure, acute liver failure, end stage renal disease (dialysis or pre-dialysis), New York Heart Association class III-IV, pregnancy, diagnosis of phenylketonuria, diagnosis of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, dementia. History of poor preparation in the previous colonoscopy, colon resection, less than 75% intake of the bowel preparation in the index colonoscopy, refusal to participate in the study, patients in whom a new colonoscopy is not indicated despite a poor bowel preparation(i.e. ileal Crohn disease with poor large bowel preparation), lack of compliance with the bowel preparation schedule.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Hospital Universitario de Canarias
Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 38320
About this study
Official title: Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Colon Cleansing Quality of Polyethylene Glycol Compared With Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid in Patients With Past Poor Colonic Preparation
The purpose of the study is to assess whether a low volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid based bowel preparation for colonoscopy is not inferior to a large volume polyethylene glycol preparation in subjects with past history of poor bowel preparation
Read the detailed description
Two key quality indicators for colonoscopy are the cecal intubation rate and the percentage of neoplastic lesions detected. Both factors are associated with adequate bowel cleansing. Poor cleansing ranged from 5% to 30% across studies, negatively affecting the efficiency of colonoscopy.
The most important factor associated with poor colonic preparation is the past history of poor bowel preparation. However, there are no recommendations on the proper type of preparation in those patients. In two non-randomized studies inadequate cleansing in the second colonoscopy ranged from 9.8% to 23%. Randomized studies comparing high volume (3-4 liters) with low volume (2 liters) PEG preparations, which are better tolerated by patients, are therefore needed before making any recommendations in this regard.
- Conditions
- Colonoscopy Preparation
- Being tested
- Polyethylene glycol 4000, Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid
- Keywords
- colon cleansing, bowel preparations; polyethyleneglycol
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Polyethylene glycol 4000Drug
- Polyethylene glycol 4000: 16 envelopes (70 g of powder each). It includes electrolytes and sodium sulfate. These substances make PEG metabolically inert, achieving a suitable osmotic balance, despite having a high molecular weight. The preparation passes along the gastrointestinal tract without causing net absorption of fluid or electrolytes. It is routinely used in clinical practice for bowel cleansing, before abdominal surgery, barium enema and other colorectal and genitourinary tract tests. Participants will divide the whole doses in 4 liters of water taking half the day before the examination starting at 20.00 h and the other half at 6.00 pm on the day of the examination.
Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acidDrug
- Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid: 4 envelopes, 2 containing 112 g polyethylene glycol and electrolytes and 2 with 2 g of ascorbic acid. The properties of the polyethylene glycol are the same as those mentioned previously, while ascorbic acid generates an osmotic gradient potentiating the effect of polyethylene glycol. It is used routinely as a bowel prep. Participants will divide the doses in 2 liters of water taking half the day before (112 g of PEG and an 11 g of ascorbic acid) the examination at 20.00 h and the other half at 6.00 pm on the day of the examination
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| High volume | Active comparator | * Two 5 mg bisacodyl tablets It is a stimulant laxative with local action.
* Polyethylene glycol 4000: 16 envelopes (70 g of powder each). It includes electrolytes and sodium sulfate. Receives: Drug: Polyethylene glycol 4000 |
| Low volume | Experimental | * Two 5 mg bisacodyl tablets, taken in the same way as for the high volume group.
* Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid: 4 envelopes, 2 containing 112 g polyethylene glycol and electrolytes and 2 with 2 g of ascorbic acid. Receives: Drug: Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Colon cleansing
Colon cleansing will be assessed just after colonoscopy by the endoscopist in charge of performing the examination and afterwards images were reviewed by a the staff of endoscopists for validation (30 days). For assessing colon cleansing a validated scale (Boston scale) will be used.
Measured: 30 days
Secondary outcomes (2)
Tolerance of bowel preparation
It will be assessed by using a visual analog scale colon
Measured: Tolerance will be assessed just before colonoscopy by a research assistant
Detection of colorectal neoplasia
Detection rate of adenoma and colorectal cancer will be assessed for both groups (low volume and high volume preparation)
Measured: 14 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Feb 2014 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2014
- Primary completionDec 2015
- Study completionMay 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (23)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colonoscopy PreparationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 472 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Fundación Canaria Rafael Clavijo para la Investigación Biomédica
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Alberto Domínguez Rodríguez, Fundación Canaria Rafael Clavijo para la Investigación Biomédica
- Investigators
- Antonio Z Gimeno García, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Hospital Universitario de Canarias
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02073552
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- REPREP1
- Other IDs
- 2013-002506-31
- Acronym
- REPREP1
- Status last verified
- Sep 2015
- First submitted
- 25 Feb 2014
- Last updated
- 27 Jun 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover JM, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J; UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial Investigators. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010 May 8;375(9726):1624-33. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60551-X. Epub 2010 Apr 27.
PubMed 20430429Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Jansen L, Knebel P, Stock C, Hoffmeister M. Reduced risk of colorectal cancer up to 10 years after screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2014 Mar;146(3):709-17. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.09.001. Epub 2013 Sep 5.
PubMed 24012982Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, Chak A, Cohen J, Deal SE, Hoffman B, Jacobson BC, Mergener K, Petersen BT, Safdi MA, Faigel DO, Pike IM; ASGE/ACG Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Apr;101(4):873-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00673.x. No abstract available.
PubMed 16635231Jover R, Herraiz M, Alarcon O, Brullet E, Bujanda L, Bustamante M, Campo R, Carreno R, Castells A, Cubiella J, Garcia-Iglesias P, Hervas AJ, Menchen P, Ono A, Panades A, Parra-Blanco A, Pellise M, Ponce M, Quintero E, Rene JM, Sanchez del Rio A, Seoane A, Serradesanferm A, Soriano Izquierdo A, Vazquez Sequeiros E; Spanish Society of Gastroenterology; Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Working Group. Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy. 2012 Apr;44(4):444-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1306690. Epub 2012 Mar 21. No abstract available.
PubMed 22438159ASGE Technology Committee; Mamula P, Adler DG, Conway JD, Diehl DL, Farraye FA, Kantsevoy SV, Kaul V, Kethu SR, Kwon RS, Rodriguez SA, Tierney WM. Colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jun;69(7):1201-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.01.035. No abstract available.
PubMed 19481646Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Moreno-de-Vega V, Boix J. [Preparation for colonoscopy: types of scales and cleaning products]. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2012 Aug;104(8):426-31. doi: 10.4321/s1130-01082012000800006. Spanish.
PubMed 23039803Nyberg C, Hendel J, Nielsen OH. The safety of osmotically acting cathartics in colonic cleansing. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Oct;7(10):557-64. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2010.136. Epub 2010 Aug 24.
PubMed 20736921Chiu HM, Lin JT, Wang HP, Lee YC, Wu MS. The impact of colon preparation timing on colonoscopic detection of colorectal neoplasms--a prospective endoscopist-blinded randomized trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Dec;101(12):2719-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00868.x. Epub 2006 Oct 6.
PubMed 17026559Parra-Blanco A, Nicolas-Perez D, Gimeno-Garcia A, Grosso B, Jimenez A, Ortega J, Quintero E. The timing of bowel preparation before colonoscopy determines the quality of cleansing, and is a significant factor contributing to the detection of flat lesions: a randomized study. World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Oct 14;12(38):6161-6. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i38.6161.
PubMed 17036388Hassan C, Bretthauer M, Kaminski MF, Polkowski M, Rembacken B, Saunders B, Benamouzig R, Holme O, Green S, Kuiper T, Marmo R, Omar M, Petruzziello L, Spada C, Zullo A, Dumonceau JM; European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy. 2013;45(2):142-50. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326186. Epub 2013 Jan 18.
PubMed 23335011Enestvedt BK, Tofani C, Laine LA, Tierney A, Fennerty MB. 4-Liter split-dose polyethylene glycol is superior to other bowel preparations, based on systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Nov;10(11):1225-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.08.029. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
PubMed 22940741Corporaal S, Kleibeuker JH, Koornstra JJ. Low-volume PEG plus ascorbic acid versus high-volume PEG as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010 Nov;45(11):1380-6. doi: 10.3109/00365521003734158. Epub 2010 Jul 5.
PubMed 20602568Ell C, Fischbach W, Bronisch HJ, Dertinger S, Layer P, Runzi M, Schneider T, Kachel G, Gruger J, Kollinger M, Nagell W, Goerg KJ, Wanitschke R, Gruss HJ. Randomized trial of low-volume PEG solution versus standard PEG + electrolytes for bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Apr;103(4):883-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01708.x. Epub 2008 Jan 11.
PubMed 18190651Gentile M, De Rosa M, Cestaro G, Forestieri P. 2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid versus 4 L PEG plus simethicon for colonoscopy preparation: a randomized single-blind clinical trial. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013 Jun;23(3):276-80. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31828e389d.
PubMed 23751992Marmo R, Rotondano G, Riccio G, Marone A, Bianco MA, Stroppa I, Caruso A, Pandolfo N, Sansone S, Gregorio E, D'Alvano G, Procaccio N, Capo P, Marmo C, Cipolletta L. Effective bowel cleansing before colonoscopy: a randomized study of split-dosage versus non-split dosage regimens of high-volume versus low-volume polyethylene glycol solutions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Aug;72(2):313-20. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.02.048. Epub 2010 Jun 19.
PubMed 20561621
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Jun 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Colon Cleansing Quality of Polyethylene Glycol Compared With Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid in Patients With Past Poor Colonic Preparation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02073552
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- REPREP1 / REPREP1
- Conditions
- Colonoscopy Preparation
- Keywords
- colon cleansing, bowel preparations; polyethyleneglycol
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 472 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Fundación Canaria Rafael Clavijo para la Investigación BiomédicaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 2014
- Primary completion
- Dec 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- May 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Feb 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of the study is to assess whether a low volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid based bowel preparation for colonoscopy is not inferior to a large volume polyethylene glycol preparation in subjects with past history of poor bowel preparation
Detailed description
Two key quality indicators for colonoscopy are the cecal intubation rate and the percentage of neoplastic lesions detected. Both factors are associated with adequate bowel cleansing. Poor cleansing ranged from 5% to 30% across studies, negatively affecting the efficiency of colonoscopy.
The most important factor associated with poor colonic preparation is the past history of poor bowel preparation. However, there are no recommendations on the proper type of preparation in those patients. In two non-randomized studies inadequate cleansing in the second colonoscopy ranged from 9.8% to 23%. Randomized studies comparing high volume (3-4 liters) with low volume (2 liters) PEG preparations, which are better tolerated by patients, are therefore needed before making any recommendations in this regard.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| High volume | Active comparator | Drug: Polyethylene glycol 4000* Two 5 mg bisacodyl tablets It is a stimulant laxative with local action. * Polyethylene glycol 4000: 16 envelopes (70 g of powder each). It includes electrolytes and sodium sulfate. |
| Low volume | Experimental | Drug: Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid* Two 5 mg bisacodyl tablets, taken in the same way as for the high volume group. * Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid: 4 envelopes, 2 containing 112 g polyethylene glycol and electrolytes and 2 with 2 g of ascorbic acid. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age> 18 years
- Outpatients with a history of past poor bowel prep, defined according to the Boston scale as a score less than 5.
- Signed informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- paralytic ileus, intestinal obstruction, megacolon, poorly controlled hypertension (systolic pressure> 180, dyastolic pressure> 100), congestive heart failure, acute liver failure, end stage renal disease (dialysis or pre-dialysis), New York Heart Association class III-IV, pregnancy, diagnosis of phenylketonuria, diagnosis of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, dementia. History of poor preparation in the previous colonoscopy, colon resection, less than 75% intake of the bowel preparation in the index colonoscopy, refusal to participate in the study, patients in whom a new colonoscopy is not indicated despite a poor bowel preparation(i.e. ileal Crohn disease with poor large bowel preparation), lack of compliance with the bowel preparation schedule.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Polyethylene glycol 4000- Polyethylene glycol 4000: 16 envelopes (70 g of powder each). It includes electrolytes and sodium sulfate. These substances make PEG metabolically inert, achieving a suitable osmotic balance, despite having a high molecular weight. The preparation passes along the gastrointestinal tract without causing net absorption of fluid or electrolytes. It is routinely used in clinical practice for bowel cleansing, before abdominal surgery, barium enema and other colorectal and genitourinary tract tests. Participants will divide the whole doses in 4 liters of water taking half the day before the examination starting at 20.00 h and the other half at 6.00 pm on the day of the examination. | Drug | High volume |
| Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid- Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid: 4 envelopes, 2 containing 112 g polyethylene glycol and electrolytes and 2 with 2 g of ascorbic acid. The properties of the polyethylene glycol are the same as those mentioned previously, while ascorbic acid generates an osmotic gradient potentiating the effect of polyethylene glycol. It is used routinely as a bowel prep. Participants will divide the doses in 2 liters of water taking half the day before (112 g of PEG and an 11 g of ascorbic acid) the examination at 20.00 h and the other half at 6.00 pm on the day of the examination | Drug | Low volume |
Primary outcome
Colon cleansing
Time frame: 30 days
Colon cleansing will be assessed just after colonoscopy by the endoscopist in charge of performing the examination and afterwards images were reviewed by a the staff of endoscopists for validation (30 days). For assessing colon cleansing a validated scale (Boston scale) will be used.
2 secondary outcomes
Tolerance of bowel preparation
Time frame: Tolerance will be assessed just before colonoscopy by a research assistant
Detection of colorectal neoplasia
Time frame: 14 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Jun 2016.
- Background: PubMed 20430429Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover JM, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J; UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial Investigators. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010 May 8;375(9726):1624-33. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60551-X. Epub 2010 Apr 27.
- Background: PubMed 24012982Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Jansen L, Knebel P, Stock C, Hoffmeister M. Reduced risk of colorectal cancer up to 10 years after screening, surveillance, or diagnostic colonoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2014 Mar;146(3):709-17. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.09.001. Epub 2013 Sep 5.
- Background: PubMed 16635231Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, Chak A, Cohen J, Deal SE, Hoffman B, Jacobson BC, Mergener K, Petersen BT, Safdi MA, Faigel DO, Pike IM; ASGE/ACG Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Apr;101(4):873-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00673.x. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 22438159Jover R, Herraiz M, Alarcon O, Brullet E, Bujanda L, Bustamante M, Campo R, Carreno R, Castells A, Cubiella J, Garcia-Iglesias P, Hervas AJ, Menchen P, Ono A, Panades A, Parra-Blanco A, Pellise M, Ponce M, Quintero E, Rene JM, Sanchez del Rio A, Seoane A, Serradesanferm A, Soriano Izquierdo A, Vazquez Sequeiros E; Spanish Society of Gastroenterology; Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Working Group. Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy. 2012 Apr;44(4):444-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1306690. Epub 2012 Mar 21. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 19481646ASGE Technology Committee; Mamula P, Adler DG, Conway JD, Diehl DL, Farraye FA, Kantsevoy SV, Kaul V, Kethu SR, Kwon RS, Rodriguez SA, Tierney WM. Colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jun;69(7):1201-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.01.035. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 23039803Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Moreno-de-Vega V, Boix J. [Preparation for colonoscopy: types of scales and cleaning products]. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2012 Aug;104(8):426-31. doi: 10.4321/s1130-01082012000800006. Spanish.
- Background: PubMed 20736921Nyberg C, Hendel J, Nielsen OH. The safety of osmotically acting cathartics in colonic cleansing. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Oct;7(10):557-64. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2010.136. Epub 2010 Aug 24.
- Background: PubMed 17026559Chiu HM, Lin JT, Wang HP, Lee YC, Wu MS. The impact of colon preparation timing on colonoscopic detection of colorectal neoplasms--a prospective endoscopist-blinded randomized trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Dec;101(12):2719-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00868.x. Epub 2006 Oct 6.
- Background: PubMed 17036388Parra-Blanco A, Nicolas-Perez D, Gimeno-Garcia A, Grosso B, Jimenez A, Ortega J, Quintero E. The timing of bowel preparation before colonoscopy determines the quality of cleansing, and is a significant factor contributing to the detection of flat lesions: a randomized study. World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Oct 14;12(38):6161-6. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i38.6161.
- Background: PubMed 23335011Hassan C, Bretthauer M, Kaminski MF, Polkowski M, Rembacken B, Saunders B, Benamouzig R, Holme O, Green S, Kuiper T, Marmo R, Omar M, Petruzziello L, Spada C, Zullo A, Dumonceau JM; European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy. 2013;45(2):142-50. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326186. Epub 2013 Jan 18.
- Background: PubMed 22940741Enestvedt BK, Tofani C, Laine LA, Tierney A, Fennerty MB. 4-Liter split-dose polyethylene glycol is superior to other bowel preparations, based on systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Nov;10(11):1225-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.08.029. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
- Background: PubMed 20602568Corporaal S, Kleibeuker JH, Koornstra JJ. Low-volume PEG plus ascorbic acid versus high-volume PEG as bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010 Nov;45(11):1380-6. doi: 10.3109/00365521003734158. Epub 2010 Jul 5.
Related trials for Colonoscopy Preparation
Recruiting
Visual Aids for Colonoscopy Preparation: A Prospective Study on Patient Understanding and Bowel Cleanliness in Colonoscopy Patients
The Effect of Audio-visual Aids on Bowel Cleanliness, Audiovisual Aids
Not yet recruiting
Social Software-Based Intelligent Management System for Bowel Preparation
Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Adenoma
Not yet recruiting
Enhanced Ward Rounds for Bowel Preparation Quality in Hospitalized Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy
Colonoscopy, Bowel Preparation
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Investigate Bowel Cleansing With PLENVU® Compared to Sodium Picosulfate in Participants Aged 1 to < 18 Years of Age in Preparation for Colonoscopy
Bowel Cleansing Prior to Clinical Procedures
Recruiting
Comparison of Electrolyte Beverages and Water as Solvents for Bowel Preparation
Bowel Preparation Before Colonoscopy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Antonio Z Gimeno García, MD, PhD principal investigator
Hospital Universitario de Canarias
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Polyethylene glycol 4000 and Macrogol 3350 plus ascorbic acid in people with Colonoscopy Preparation, run by Fundación Canaria Rafael Clavijo para la Investigación Biomédica at 1 site in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jun 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Colon cleansing (time frame: 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02073552, which also lists 23 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jun 2016.