Optimal Bowel Cleansing Trial

NCT ID: NCT01624454

Last Updated: 2013-05-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

380 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-04-30

Study Completion Date

2012-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Comparison between large volume and osmotic agent lavage for optimal colonoscopy bowel cleansing, randomizing adult outpatients by invitation letter

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This randomized quality assurance trial aims to compare cleansing quality of two different principles of colonoscopy lavage. Large volume PEG solutions are considered safe, but cumbersome and inpalatable, while osmotic solutions are generally more acceptable, however, the risk of electrolyte disturbances or renal decompensation may increase.

The study will focus on patient experience and compliance, as well as cleansing quality, endoscopic findings and other technical parameters of the colonoscopy procedure that may be adversely affected by poor bowel cleansing. Three centers will participate, ensuring a diverse patient population. 800 patients are planned for recruitment, but an interim assessment of statistics of the primary aim parameter (bowel cleansing) will be performed to adjust the number.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

large volume

bowel cleansing with PEG

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Laxabon

Intervention Type OTHER

4 l PEG solution split dose cleansing

Osmotic

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

CitraFleet

Intervention Type OTHER

Small volume osmotic bowelcleansing

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Laxabon

4 l PEG solution split dose cleansing

Intervention Type OTHER

CitraFleet

Small volume osmotic bowelcleansing

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Pts for out-patient colonoscopy
* age 18-80

Exclusion Criteria

* Active colitis or suspicion thereof (bloody diarrhea, fever and abdominal pain)
* Suspicion of renal insufficiency or ileus/subileus
* Previous colonic surgery
* Pregnancy
* Inability to adhere to cleansing instructions
* Inability to consent
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Helse Stavanger HF

OTHER_GOV

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Lars Aabakken, prof of med

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Prof of medicine

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

OUS Rikshospitalet, dept of med gastro

Oslo, Oslo County, Norway

Site Status

Sørlandet sykehus

Kristiansand, VestAgder, Norway

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Norway

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Leitao K, Grimstad T, Bretthauer M, Holme O, Paulsen V, Karlsen L, Isaksen K, Cvancarova M, Aabakken L. Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation. Endosc Int Open. 2014 Dec;2(4):E230-4. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377520. Epub 2014 Oct 24.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 26135098 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

SUS-CRAP

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.