A randomized single-blind trial of standard diet versus fiber-free diet with polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution for colonoscopy preparation

Background and study aims: Colonoscopy preparation usually involves the intake of large volumes of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG-ES) in combination with a clear-liquid diet (CLD). Liberalization of the diet might enhance the tolerance to PEG-ES without compromising the quality of the preparation. The primary aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of PEG-ES given with a CLD compared with a fiber-free diet (FFD) for colonoscopy preparation. The incidence of adverse events among patients in the two diet groups was also assessed as a secondary outcome.

Methods: This was a single-center randomized, prospective, single-blind study. A total of 200 patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized to either CLD or FFD in addition to PEG-ES.

Results: Patients in the FFD group were able to drink more PEG-ES (mean ± SD, 3.9 ± 0.3 L) compared with those in the CLD group (3.3 ± 0.7 L) (P < 0.01). The quality of the preparation was significantly better in the FFD group, with more patients having satisfactory preparations than those in the CLD group (81.4 % vs. 52.0 %; P < 0.001). Tolerance to the preparation was higher in the FFD group compared with the CLD group, with significantly more patients adhering to the FFD regimen (P < 0.001). There were more adverse events experienced in the CLD group, with odds ratios of 1.9 for nausea (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.0 – 3.6), 3.8 for vomiting (95 % CI 1.3 – 11.3), and 3.0 for headache (95 % CI 1.5 – 5.9).

Conclusion: FFD given with PEG-ES on the day before colonoscopy is a more effective regimen than the standard CLD regimen, and is better tolerated by patients.

References

• 1 Harewood G C, Sharma V K, de Garmo P. Impact of colonoscopy preparation quality on detection of suspected colonic neoplasia.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 76-79
• 2 Froehlich F, Wietlisbach V, Gonvers J J. et al . Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  61 378-384
• 3 Thomas-Gibson S, Rogers P, Cooper S. et al . Judgement of the quality of bowel preparation at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with variability in adenoma detection rates.  Endoscopy. 2006;  38 456-460
• 4 Rex D K, Imperiale T F, Latinovich D R. et al . Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 1696-1700
• 5 Davis G R, Santa Ana C A, Morawski S G. et al . Development of a lavage solution associated with minimal water and electrolyte absorption or secretion.  Gastroenterology. 1980;  78 (5 Pt 1) 991-995
• 6 Ainley E J, Winwood P J, Begley J P. Measurement of serum electrolytes and phosphate after sodium phosphate colonoscopy bowel preparation: an evaluation.  Dig Dis Sci. 2005;  50 1319-1323
• 7 Hsu C W, Imperiale T F. Metaanalysis and cost comparison of polyethylene glycol lavage versus sodium phosphate for colonoscopy preparation.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  48 276-282
• 8 Van Gorkom B A, Karrenbeld A, Limburg A J. et al . The effect of sennosides on colonic mucosal histology and bowel preparation.  Z Gastroenterol. 1998;  36 13-18
• 9 Hookey L C, Depew W T, Vanner S J. A prospective randomized trial comparing low-dose oral sodium phosphate plus stimulant laxatives with large volume polyethylene glycol solution for colon cleansing.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;  99 2217-2222
• 10 Jayanthi V, Ramathilakam B, Malathi S. et al . Comparison of polyethylene glycol versus combination of magnesium sulphate and bisacodyl for colon preparation.  Trop Gastroenterol. 2000;  21 18-19
• 11 Sharma V K, Chockalingham S K, Ugheoke E A. et al . Prospective, randomized, controlled comparison of the use of polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution in four-liter versus two-liter volumes and pretreatment with either magnesium citrate or bisacodyl for colonoscopy preparation.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  47 167-171
• 12 Ginzberg L, Greenwald D. Risks of preparation for endoscopy.  Tech Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  9 205-207
• 13 Toledo T K, DiPalma J A. Review article: colon cleansing preparation for gastrointestinal procedures.  Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2001;  15 605-611
• 14 Hwang K L, Chen W T, Hsiao K H. et al . Prospective randomized comparison of oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene glycol lavage for colonoscopy preparation.  World J Gastroenterol. 2005;  11 7486-7493
• 15 Katsinelos P, Pilpilidis I, Paroutoglou G. et al . The administration of cisapride as an adjuvant to PEG-electrolyte solution for colonic cleansing: a double-blind randomized study.  Hepatogastroenterology. 2005;  52 441-443
• 16 DiPalma J A, Wolff B G, Meagher A. et al . Comparison of reduced volume versus four liters sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solutions for colonoscopy colon cleansing.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;  98 2187-2191
• 17 Hayes A, Buffum M, Fuller D. Bowel preparation comparison: flavored versus unflavored colyte.  Gastroenterol Nurs. 2003;  26 106-109
• 18 Sharma V K, Chockalingham S K, Ugheoke E A. et al . Prospective, randomized, controlled comparison of the use of polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution in four-liter versus two-liter volumes and pretreatment with either magnesium citrate or bisacodyl for colonoscopy preparation.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;  47 167-171
• 19 Raymer G S, Hartman D E, Rowe W A. et al . An open-label trial of L-glucose as a colon-cleansing agent before colonoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 30-35
• 20 El Sayed A M, Kanafani Z A, Mourad F H. et al . A randomized single-blind trial of whole versus split-dose polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solution for colonoscopy preparation.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 36-40
• 21 Aoun E, Abdul-Baki H, Azar C. et al . A randomized single-blind trial of split-dose PEG-electrolyte solution without dietary restriction compared with whole dose PEG-electrolyte solution with dietary restriction for colonoscopy preparation.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  62 213-218
• 22 Rapier R, Houston C. A prospective study to assess the efficacy and patient tolerance of three bowel preparations for colonoscopy.  Gastroenterol Nurs. 2006;  29 305-308
• 23 Delegge M, Kaplan R. Efficacy of bowel preparation with the use of a prepackaged, low fibre diet with low sodium, magnesium citrate cathartic vs. a clear liquid diet with a standard sodium phosphate cathartic.  Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;  21 1491-1495
• 24 Scott S R, Raymond P L, Thompson W O. et al . Efficacy and tolerance of sodium phosphates oral solution after diet liberalization.  Gastroenterol Nurs. 2005;  28 133-139
• 25 Hale W E, Perkins L L, May F E. et al . Symptom prevalence in the elderly. An evaluation of age, sex, disease, and medication use.  J Am Geriatr Soc. 1986;  34 333-340
• 26 Taylor C, Schubert M L. Decreased efficacy of polyethylene glycol lavage solution in the preparation of diabetic patients for outpatient colonoscopy: a prospective and blinded study.  Am J Gastroenterology. 2001;  96 710-714
• 27 Church J M. Effectiveness of polyethylene glycol antegrade gut lavage bowel preparation for colonoscopy – timing is the key!.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;  41 1223-1225
• 28 Siddiqui A, Yang K, Spechler S J. et al . Duration of the interval between the completion of bowel preparation and the start of colonoscopy predicts bowel preparation quality.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;  69 700-706