Bowel Cleansing Effectiveness of Sulfate-Based Tablet Versus Sulfate-Based Solution for Outpatient Colonoscopy: A Retrospective Noninferiority Study.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Hamid Reza Moein, Brandon Karimian, Thomas W Edwards, Mohamed Seisa, Jarred Kendziorski, Rahul Patel, Madeline Vithya Barnaba Durairaj, Lauren Shelton, Samuel Addo, Claire Rinaldo, Gerald W Mank, Suneel Mohammed
{"title":"Bowel Cleansing Effectiveness of Sulfate-Based Tablet Versus Sulfate-Based Solution for Outpatient Colonoscopy: A Retrospective Noninferiority Study.","authors":"Hamid Reza Moein, Brandon Karimian, Thomas W Edwards, Mohamed Seisa, Jarred Kendziorski, Rahul Patel, Madeline Vithya Barnaba Durairaj, Lauren Shelton, Samuel Addo, Claire Rinaldo, Gerald W Mank, Suneel Mohammed","doi":"10.1007/s10620-025-08975-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bowel preparation quality is one of the most important quality measures in colonoscopy. Sulfate-based tablets (Sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, potassium chloride) and sulfate-based solution (sodium, magnesium, potassium sulfate) are commonly used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy. However, there has been no comparison between these two.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare the bowel preparation quality and colonoscopy quality metrics between sulfate-based tablet sand solution, both given as a split-dose.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, cross-sectional study in an outpatient endoscopy suite. Patients who chose sulfate-based tablet or solution were included in this study. Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) was used for measurement of bowel preparation quality. Primary endpoint is defined as adequate bowel preparation (any segment score ≥ 2). Secondary endpoints included total BBPS score, adenoma detection rate (ADR), withdrawal time, and cecal intubation rate. A noninferiority test was conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 517 patients were included (161 in sulfate-based tablet and 356 in sulfate-based solution group). Sulfate-based tablet resulted in more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate-based solution (98.1 vs. 93.8%; p = 0.044). Total BBPS score was 7.14 ± 1.03 and 7.04 ± 1.22 in tablet and solution groups, respectively (p = 0.366). ADR (37.2 vs. 40.3%; p = 0.681), cecal intubation rate, and withdrawal time were not statistically different between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Split-dose sulfate-based tablet is noninferior to split-dose sulfate-based solution in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy. Sulfate tablets may lead to more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate solution likely due to better tolerance. There was no significant difference in colonoscopy quality metric measures between sulfate-based tablet and solution.</p>","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-025-08975-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bowel preparation quality is one of the most important quality measures in colonoscopy. Sulfate-based tablets (Sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, potassium chloride) and sulfate-based solution (sodium, magnesium, potassium sulfate) are commonly used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy. However, there has been no comparison between these two.

Aims: To compare the bowel preparation quality and colonoscopy quality metrics between sulfate-based tablet sand solution, both given as a split-dose.

Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional study in an outpatient endoscopy suite. Patients who chose sulfate-based tablet or solution were included in this study. Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) was used for measurement of bowel preparation quality. Primary endpoint is defined as adequate bowel preparation (any segment score ≥ 2). Secondary endpoints included total BBPS score, adenoma detection rate (ADR), withdrawal time, and cecal intubation rate. A noninferiority test was conducted.

Results: A total of 517 patients were included (161 in sulfate-based tablet and 356 in sulfate-based solution group). Sulfate-based tablet resulted in more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate-based solution (98.1 vs. 93.8%; p = 0.044). Total BBPS score was 7.14 ± 1.03 and 7.04 ± 1.22 in tablet and solution groups, respectively (p = 0.366). ADR (37.2 vs. 40.3%; p = 0.681), cecal intubation rate, and withdrawal time were not statistically different between groups.

Conclusions: Split-dose sulfate-based tablet is noninferior to split-dose sulfate-based solution in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy. Sulfate tablets may lead to more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate solution likely due to better tolerance. There was no significant difference in colonoscopy quality metric measures between sulfate-based tablet and solution.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Digestive Diseases and Sciences 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
420
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信