AzTrials
AzTrials

Functional ConstipationPhase 4NCT06349031

Comparison of Efficacy & Tolerability Of PEG 4000 Versus PEG 3350+ Electrolytes for Pediatric Fecal Disimpaction

A Phase 4 study testing Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participants and Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participants in people with Functional Constipation and Fecal Impaction, run by Institute of Medical Sciences and SUM Hospital at 1 site in India.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Childhood constipation is a common but serious gastrointestinal disorder prevalent worldwide. In 90-95% of children, it is of functional origin. Thirty to seventy-five percent of children with functional constipation also have fecal impaction. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 1 year to 16 years
What is being tested?
Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participants and Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participants
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
100 participants
Where
1 siteIndia
Study dates
15 Apr 2024to 15 Sep 2024
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 1 year to 16 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child

Who may be able to join

  • 1-16 years age admitted to the inpatient department 2. Having h/o functional constipation as per ROME IV criteria 3)with Fecal impaction defined as A hard mass in the lower abdomen identified on physical examination or Dilated rectum filled with large amount of stool on per rectal Examination or Excessive stool in the colon on abdominal radiography as determined by a radiologist

Who cannot join

  • Patients with drug-induced constipation
  • Organic constipation ie, I.Neurological disorders eg. Neural tube defects/cerebral/motor neuron diseases/neuro regression syndromes II.Hirschsprung disease, or anal anomalies III.Known metabolic or endocrine disorders
  • Patients with previous gastrointestinal surgery (except appendectomy)
  • Children with suspected gastrointestinal obstruction
  • Patients taking PEG (either at the time of enrolment or within 2 month before enrolment)
  • Patients receiving medication at enrolment or within 1 month before enrolment influencing gastrointestinal motility function (eg, lactulose, loperamide, cisapride)
Show all 9Show fewer
  • Known history of Allergy to PEG formulations
  • Patients having comorbidity of any other system like CVS/Respiratory/CNS etc
  • Known case of Chronic kidney disease or history of acute kidney injury in past 3 monthes

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Kalpana Panda, MD, DM contact

91-9717133189

drkalpanapanda@gmail.com

J Bikrant Kumar Prusty, MD contact

91-9090205041

princjammy142@gmail.com

India1 site
  • Institute of Medical Sciences (IMS) and SUM Hospital

    Bhubaneswar, Odisha, 751003

    Kalpana Panda, MD, DM, 91-9717133189, drkalpanapanda@gmail.com

    J Bikrant kumar Prusty, MD, 91-9090205041, princejammy142@gmail.com

Other trials in India

About this study

Official title: Comparison of Efficacy & Tolerability Of Polyethylene Glycol 4000 Versus Polyethylene Glycol 3350+ Electrolytes For Fecal Disimpaction in Pediatric Functional Constipation: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Childhood constipation is a common but serious gastrointestinal disorder prevalent worldwide. In 90-95% of children, it is of functional origin. Thirty to seventy-five percent of children with functional constipation also have fecal impaction. The treatment strategy for functional constipation includes fecal disimpaction and maintenance therapy to ensure regular bowel movements.

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) based laxatives have been recommended as the first-line therapeutic agents. The commonly used formulations are PEG 3350 with a molecular weight between 3200- 3700 g/mol and PEG 4000 with molecular weight of 4000 g/mol. Both are shown to be effective in pediatric constipation management in placebo-controlled trials. PEG 3350 + Electrolyte (E) is more widely used than PEG 4000 for the management of constipation. This might be because of the perception that PEG 3350 + E is safer in terms of preventing electrolyte imbalance. However, because of the inclusion of electrolytes, PEG 3350+ E solution taste saltier than PEG 4000. Many patients struggle to tolerate the unpleasant taste resulting in the high incidence of non-compliance. To date, no pediatric trials have compared PEG 4000 versus PEG 3350+E for management of Fecal disimpaction.

Read more

Present study has been planned to evaluate the efficacy \& tolerability of PEG 4000 versus PEG 3350+ E for fecal disimpaction in pediatric functional constipation. Patients between age 1-16 years having functional constipation (as per ROME IV criteria) with fecal impaction will be included. Subjects will be randomly assigned to either PEG 4000 or PEG 3350+E at a ratio of 1:1. They will be stratified into 3 different age groups: 1-5 years, 6-11 years, and 12-16 years. They will receive either of the PEG solutions (as per allocation) at a dose of 1.5 gm/kg/day for 6 consecutive days or till the resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier. The resolution of fecal impaction is defined as the passage of clear liquid stool and the disappearance of palpable abdominal fecolith.

Primary outcome is defined as the proportion of subjects achieving fecal disimpaction in each arm.

Secondary outcomes are defined as follows:

  1. Total no of Days required to achieve fecal disimpaction in each arm
  2. Cumulative dose of PEG required for fecal disimpaction in each arm
  3. Proportion of subjects (> 5 years age) reporting palatability issues in each arm
  4. Proportion of subjects discontinuing the treatment due to palatability issues in each arm
Read the detailed description

Childhood constipation is a common but serious gastrointestinal disorder prevalent worldwide. In approximately 90-95% of children, it is of functional origin i.e., without an identifiable organic pathology. It accounts for 3% of pediatric outpatient visits and 25% of referrals to a pediatric gastroenterologist. Prevalence rates ranging from 0.7% to 29.6% with a median of 8.9% have been described in the older literature, with a higher prevalence in Asian population. However, in a recent study, using the Rome IV criteria, the pooled global prevalence of pediatric functional constipation is found to be 14.4% (95%CI: 11.2-17.6). Severe longstanding constipation is distressing for the entire family and poses a substantial psychological, social, and educational strain on the child's development.

Thirty to seventy-five percent of children with functional constipation also have fecal impaction. It typically begins after several bouts of painful bowel movements, which triggers a vicious cycle of fear-induced stool-withholding behavior leading to more stool retention. Consequently, a significant amount of feces accumulates in the rectum forming a big fecal mass or fecaloma, causing a variety of complaints, including gastrointestinal discomfort, excessive flatulence, nausea or vomiting, poor appetite, mood swings \& irritability. European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) \& the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (NASPGHAN) position paper on pediatric constipation defines fecal impaction as any one of the following: i) palpation of a hard mass in the lower abdomen on physical examination, ii) a dilated rectum filled with a large amount of stool on rectal examination, iii) abdominal radiography showing excessive stool in the distal colon.

The treatment strategy for functional constipation includes fecal disimpaction and maintenance therapy to ensure regular bowel movements. ESPGHAN \& NASPGHAN guidelines emphasize that maintenance therapy remains ineffective until disimpaction has been achieved. If initial disimpaction is skipped, oral laxative therapy may paradoxically worsen fecal incontinence/encopresis attributable to overflow diarrhea.

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) based laxatives have been recommended as the first-line therapeutic agents for both disimpaction as well as maintenance therapy in childhood functional constipation. PEG, a biologically inert polymer of the formula H(OCH2CH2)nOH in which n is 68-84. These are non-absorbable polymers, that create an osmotic gradient in the intestinal lumen leading to fluid retention which in turn softens and loosens the stool. Hence, they act as osmotic laxatives. As it does not carry any electrical charge, it does not influence the movement of any other solutes. The commonly used formulations are PEG 3350 with a molecular weight between 3200 and 3700 g/mol and PEG 4000 with an approximate molecular weight of 4000 g/mol. Both are shown to be effective in pediatric constipation management in placebo-controlled trials. However, there is scanty literature available comparing other aspects of various PEG formulations, such as tolerability, palatability, \& convenience of administration, which may affect treatment adherence and thus the ultimate treatment outcome. PEG + Electrolyte (E) is more widely used than PEG for the management of constipation. This might be because of the perception that PEG + E is safer in terms of preventing electrolyte imbalance.

However, several head-to-head trials using different PEG formulations in adult constipation patients, showed comparable efficacy and safety. Because of the inclusion of electrolytes, PEG+E tastes saltier than PEG. Many patients struggle to tolerate the unpleasant taste resulting in the high incidence of non-compliance and treatment failure . Two studies from the adult population have demonstrated better acceptance of PEG in comparison to PEG+E . In fact, the latest meta-analysis concluded that the addition of electrolytes to PEG does not provide any clinical benefits over PEG alone.

In a recent double-blind RCT, PEG 4000 is found to be equally efficacious and safe as PEG 3350 + E as a long-term maintenance therapy in children with functional constipation . However, they have not described the tolerability or acceptability data of the cohort. There is only a single pediatric study that showed, PEG 4000 is equally effective and had a higher patient acceptance rate owing to significantly lesser nausea, vomiting episodes, and better palatability compared to PEG 3350. However, both these studies are majorly focused on the comparison between PEG 3350 + E versus PEG 4000 as a long-term maintenance therapy in pediatric functional constipation. There is only a single study that compared PEG 3350 versus PEG 3350 only laxative for fecal disimpaction. Both of them were found to almost equally effective in resolution of fecal impaction, however PEG 3350 + E group had significantly higher side effects as compared to PEG 3350 only laxative.

To date, no pediatric trials have compared PEG versus PEG+E on a head-to-head basis for the treatment of the initial but most important \& crucial step of pediatric function constipation management i.e. Fecal disimpaction. Since fecal disimpaction requires administration of a significantly larger volume of PEG administration, palatability becomes a major factor determining the success of disimpaction. On the other hand, there is also of higher possibility of side effects like electrolyte \& acid base imbalances because of higher purge rate during disimpaction. Comparison of both these parameters namely tolerability/palatability and safety/side effects profile of PEG versus PEG + E during fecal disimpaction in pediatric population has not been studied previously.

Therefore, the present study has been planned with an aim to evaluate the efficacy \& tolerability of PEG 4000 versus PEG 3350+ electrolytes for fecal disimpaction in paediatric functional constipation.

Being tested
Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participants, Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participants
Keywords
Functional constipation, Fecal disimpaction, pediatric, Polyethelene glycol 3350, Polyethylene glycol 4000
Medical subject headings
Fecal Impaction

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participantsDrug

    As per treatment allocation, PEG 4000 will be administered to participants at a dose of 1.5 gm/kg/day dissolved in water until resolution of fecal impaction or a maximum till 6 days whichever is earlier. Fecal impaction Resolution is defined as : Passage of clear liquid stool and no palpable abdominal fecolith

  • Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participantsDrug

    As per treatment allocation, PEG 3350 + Electrolytes will be administered to participants at a dose of 1.5 gm/kg/day dissolved in water until resolution of fecal impaction or a maximum till 6 days whichever is earlier. Fecal impaction Resolution is defined as : Passage of clear liquid stool and no palpable abdominal fecolith

Study groups in NCT06349031
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) 3350 +Electrolytes ARMActive comparator[PEG 33500+Electrolyte] will be administered at a dose of 1.5 gm/kg/day dissolved in water until resolution of fecal impaction or a maximum till 6 days whichever is earlier. Fecal impaction Resolution is defined as passage of clear liquid stool and no palpable abdominal fecolith
Receives: Drug: Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participants
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) 4000 ARMExperimentalPEG 4000 will be administered at a dose of 1.5 gm/kg/day dissolved in water until resolution of fecal impaction or a maximum till 6 days whichever is earlier. Fecal impaction Resolution is defined as : Passage of clear liquid stool and no palpable abdominal fecolith
Receives: Drug: Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participants

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Proportion of subjects achieving fecal disimpaction in Each Arm

    The proportion of subjects achieving fecal disimpaction in Each Arm

    Measured: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Total no of Days required to achieve fecal disimpaction in each arm

    Total no of Days required to achieve fecal disimpaction in each arm

    Measured: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier

  2. Cumulative PEG dose required for fecal disimpaction in each arm

    Cumulative PEG dose required for fecal disimpaction in each arm

    Measured: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier

  3. Proportion of subjects reporting palatability issues in each arm

    Proportion of subjects reporting palatability issues in each arm

    Measured: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier

  4. Proportion of subjects discontinuing the treatment due to palatability issues in each arm

    Proportion of subjects discontinuing the treatment due to palatability issues in each arm

    Measured: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted5 Apr 2024
  2. Study start15 Apr 2024 (estimated)
  3. Primary completion15 Sep 2024 (estimated)
  4. Study completion15 Sep 2024 (estimated)

Resources

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
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
DOUBLE BLIND RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Masking
Quadruple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
100 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06349031
Sponsor's protocol ID
IEC/IMS.SH/SOA/2024/683
Status last verified
Apr 2024
First submitted
30 Mar 2024
Last updated
12 Apr 2024
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Benninga MA, Voskuijl WP, Taminiau JA. Childhood constipation: is there new light in the tunnel? J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2004 Nov;39(5):448-64. doi: 10.1097/00005176-200411000-00002. No abstract available.

    PubMed 15572881
  • Rubin G, Dale A. Chronic constipation in children. BMJ. 2006 Nov 18;333(7577):1051-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39007.760174.47. No abstract available.

    PubMed 17110723
  • van den Berg MM, Benninga MA, Di Lorenzo C. Epidemiology of childhood constipation: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Oct;101(10):2401-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00771.x.

    PubMed 17032205
  • Tran DL, Sintusek P. Functional constipation in children: What physicians should know. World J Gastroenterol. 2023 Feb 28;29(8):1261-1288. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i8.1261.

    PubMed 36925458
  • Rasquin A, Di Lorenzo C, Forbes D, Guiraldes E, Hyams JS, Staiano A, Walker LS. Childhood functional gastrointestinal disorders: child/adolescent. Gastroenterology. 2006 Apr;130(5):1527-37. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.08.063.

    PubMed 16678566
  • Shatnawi MS, Alrwalah MM, Ghanma AM, Alqura'an ML, Zreiqat EN, Alzu'bi MM. Lactulose versus polyethylene glycol for disimpaction therapy in constipated children, a randomized controlled study. Sudan J Paediatr. 2019;19(1):31-36. doi: 10.24911/SJP.106-1546805996.

    PubMed 31384086
  • Tabbers MM, DiLorenzo C, Berger MY, Faure C, Langendam MW, Nurko S, Staiano A, Vandenplas Y, Benninga MA; European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition; North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology. Evaluation and treatment of functional constipation in infants and children: evidence-based recommendations from ESPGHAN and NASPGHAN. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2014 Feb;58(2):258-74. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000000266.

    PubMed 24345831
  • Alper A, Pashankar DS. Polyethylene glycol: a game-changer laxative for children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013 Aug;57(2):134-40. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0b013e318296404a.

    PubMed 23591910
  • Treepongkaruna S, Simakachorn N, Pienvichit P, Varavithya W, Tongpenyai Y, Garnier P, Mathiex-Fortunet H. A randomised, double-blind study of polyethylene glycol 4000 and lactulose in the treatment of constipation in children. BMC Pediatr. 2014 Jun 19;14:153. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-14-153.

    PubMed 24943105
  • Candy DC, Edwards D, Geraint M. Treatment of faecal impaction with polyethelene glycol plus electrolytes (PGE + E) followed by a double-blind comparison of PEG + E versus lactulose as maintenance therapy. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2006 Jul;43(1):65-70. doi: 10.1097/01.mpg.0000228097.58960.e6.

    PubMed 16819379
  • Youssef NN, Peters JM, Henderson W, Shultz-Peters S, Lockhart DK, Di Lorenzo C. Dose response of PEG 3350 for the treatment of childhood fecal impaction. J Pediatr. 2002 Sep;141(3):410-4. doi: 10.1067/mpd.2002.126603.

    PubMed 12219064
  • Bekkali NL, van den Berg MM, Dijkgraaf MG, van Wijk MP, Bongers ME, Liem O, Benninga MA. Rectal fecal impaction treatment in childhood constipation: enemas versus high doses oral PEG. Pediatrics. 2009 Dec;124(6):e1108-15. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0022.

    PubMed 19948614
  • Miller MK, Dowd MD, Friesen CA, Walsh-Kelly CM. A randomized trial of enema versus polyethylene glycol 3350 for fecal disimpaction in children presenting to an emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Feb;28(2):115-9. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3182442c0a.

    PubMed 22270500
  • Seinela L, Sairanen U, Laine T, Kurl S, Pettersson T, Happonen P. Comparison of polyethylene glycol with and without electrolytes in the treatment of constipation in elderly institutionalized patients: a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Drugs Aging. 2009;26(8):703-13. doi: 10.2165/11316470-000000000-00000.

    PubMed 19685935
  • Chaussade S, Minic M. Comparison of efficacy and safety of two doses of two different polyethylene glycol-based laxatives in the treatment of constipation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003 Jan;17(1):165-72. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01390.x.

    PubMed 12492746

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 4 study testing Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 4000 as per treatment allocation to participants and Administration of Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 3350 + Electrolyte as per treatment allocation to participants in people with Functional Constipation and Fecal Impaction, run by Institute of Medical Sciences and SUM Hospital at 1 site in India.

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 1 inclusion and 9 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Apr 2024. 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 India. 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?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Kalpana Panda, MD, DM (91-9717133189, drkalpanapanda@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Proportion of subjects achieving fecal disimpaction in Each Arm (time frame: 6 days from allocation of treatment or resolution of fecal impaction whichever is earlier). 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 NCT06349031, which also lists 20 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 12 Apr 2024.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in