PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy (TARE-05-073M)
| Tracking Information | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Received Date ICMJE | October 19, 2006 | ||||||||
| Last Updated Date | March 23, 2011 | ||||||||
| Start Date ICMJE | September 2005 | ||||||||
| Primary Completion Date | December 2006 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||||||
| Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Efficacy of large bowel cleansing as assessed by the physician performing the colonoscopy. Two validated scoring systems are used. | ||||||||
| Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||||||
| Change History | Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00390598 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site | ||||||||
| Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||||||
| Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||||||
| Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||||||
| Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||||||
| Descriptive Information | |||||||||
| Brief Title ICMJE | PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy | ||||||||
| Official Title ICMJE | A Single Blind, Single Centre, Parallel Group, Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 4L Versus Senna Glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg and PEG Solution (Laxabon®) 2L for Large Bowel Cleansing Prior to Colonoscopy | ||||||||
| Brief Summary | The trial compares Laxabon® 4L versus Pursennid® Ex-Lax 36mg and 2L Laxabon® for large bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy allocating patients planned for colonoscopy to one of the two cleansing regimens. |
||||||||
| Detailed Description | Effective large bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy is still not achieved in all cases that undergo the procedure. The use of balanced electrolyte-polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution have improved the cleansing results and shortened the time needed for preparing the bowel. The problem with using PEG solution alone is the relatively large volume of the solution that the patients need to drink. The recommendation is to drink the solution until diarrhea fluid is clear and often 4 L or more is needed. Many patients refuse to drink the sufficient volume needed to get a clean colon. The large volume load can be a risk to patients suffering from renal and/or heart insufficiency. Good results of bowel cleansing have also been reported with sodium phosphate solution or tablets. The fluid volume needed to drink along with sodium phosphate is generally no problem but this regimen causes electrolyte disturbances that usually are subclinical and of no significance but in patients with renal or heart insufficiency the sodium phosphate is contraindicated due to the risk of serious electrolyte disturbances. Several combinations of stimulant laxatives with PEG solution have been tested before and the actual combination has been compared in one randomized study(1). Low-volume PEG plus sennosides preparation was better tolerated but it was not as effective as standard large-volume PEG. PEG solution (Laxabon®) 4L is used for large bowel cleansing in many centers in Sweden and is the standard regimen used in our colonoscopy unit. In this study we compare this standard regimen with senna glycoside (Pursennid® Ex-Lax) 36mg (tablets) taken orally in the night before the colonoscopy and 2L Laxabon® solution orally starting to drink the solution four hours prior to the colonoscopy. The result of large bowel cleansing is evaluated during the colonoscopy according to two separate validated scoring methods (Aronchick and Ottawa scores). Abdominal symptoms, discomfort, subjective grading of how hard/easy it was to complete the cleansing program and extra costs are evaluated with questionnaires. |
||||||||
| Study Type ICMJE | Interventional | ||||||||
| Study Phase | Phase 2 Phase 3 |
||||||||
| Study Design ICMJE | Allocation: Randomized Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Single Blind Primary Purpose: Treatment |
||||||||
| Condition ICMJE | Colonoscopy | ||||||||
| Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||||||
| Study Arm (s) |
|
||||||||
| Publications * |
|
||||||||
|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||||||
| Recruitment Information | |||||||||
| Recruitment Status ICMJE | Completed | ||||||||
| Enrollment ICMJE | 490 | ||||||||
| Completion Date | December 2006 | ||||||||
| Primary Completion Date | December 2006 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||||||
| Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||||||
| Gender | Both | ||||||||
| Ages | 18 Years and older | ||||||||
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No | ||||||||
| Contacts ICMJE | Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects | ||||||||
| Location Countries ICMJE | Sweden | ||||||||
| Administrative Information | |||||||||
| NCT Number ICMJE | NCT00390598 | ||||||||
| Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | TARE-05-073M | ||||||||
| Has Data Monitoring Committee | Not Provided | ||||||||
| Responsible Party | Markku Haapamäki, Umea University | ||||||||
| Study Sponsor ICMJE | Umeå University | ||||||||
| Collaborators ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||||||
| Investigators ICMJE |
|
||||||||
| Information Provided By | Umeå University | ||||||||
| Verification Date | December 2008 | ||||||||
|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |
|||||||||