MedPath

Bowel Preparation Regimen for Colon Capsule Endoscopy Procedure

Phase 3
Completed
Conditions
Colon Polyp
Colon Cancer
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Gastrointestinal Bleed
Interventions
Drug: polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid
Drug: magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate
Registration Number
NCT05726097
Lead Sponsor
Region Skane
Brief Summary

The study aims to investigate the effect of the optimized bowel preparation and boost regimens on colon capsule endoscopy procedures, specifically on cleanliness and completion rate.

Detailed Description

Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a promising modality for lower gastrointestinal (GI) investigations in clinical routine and screening. Furthermore, the double-headed camera capsules are being applied for panenteric investigations, with promising results. The major limitation to its use has been finding a bowel preparation that will clean the colon adequately for good visualization of the mucosa and help propel the capsule using boosters through the colon. To achieve wider CCE adoption, challenges regarding completion rates (CR) and adequate cleanliness rates (ACR) must be handled. CR and ACR should be improved to meet the standards for optical colonoscopy (OC) from the European Society of GI Endoscopy (ESGE). ESGE recommends both CR and ACR ≥ 90%. Recently, a meta-analysis of preparation regimens for CCE confirmed that CR and ACR were suboptimal.

This study is designed to investigate the CR, ACR, and diagnostic yield (DY) of very low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) - based laxative compared to a conventional high-volume laxative and the use of different boosters.

All consecutive patients referred for colon capsule endoscopy will be enrolled in the study. PillCam® Crohn's capsule will be used. Patients will undergo a split-dose bowel preparation with a very low-volume PEG-based laxative. In the study arm nr1 gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate will be used. In the study arm Nr 2, the same regimen will be used but completed with 2 mg of prucalopride before ingesting the capsule. The results of the study arms will be compared to the previously used standard regimen with 4 L of PEG as a laxative and sodium phosphate as a booster.

The images from the colon capsule will be reviewed, and the quality of bowel preparation (cleanliness rates) and completion rate will be evaluated. Patient tolerance of the bowel preparations and diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy using the different preparation regimens will also be evaluated.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
147
Inclusion Criteria
  • Subject referred for clinical colon/panenteric examination
  • Subject received an explanation about the nature of the study and agreed to provide written informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
  • Subject with dysphagia or any swallowing disorder
  • Subject with a prior stomach, small bowel, or colonic resection
  • Subject with severe renal insufficiency
  • Subject with any allergy or other known contraindication to the medications used in the study
  • Women who are either pregnant or nursing
  • Subject suffers from life threatening conditions

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
SEQUENTIAL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Optimized preparation regimen with prucaloprideprucalopride1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster + 2 mg of prucalopride
Standard preparation regimenpolyethylene glycol4 L polyethylene glycol as laxative 30 + 15 mL sodium phosphate as a booster
Optimized preparation regimenpolyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster
Optimized preparation regimengastrografin1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster
Optimized preparation regimenmagnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster
Optimized preparation regimen with prucalopridepolyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster + 2 mg of prucalopride
Optimized preparation regimen with prucalopridegastrografin1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster + 2 mg of prucalopride
Optimized preparation regimen with prucalopridemagnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate1 L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid as laxative and gastrografin and magnesiumoxid + sodium picosulfate as a booster + 2 mg of prucalopride
Standard preparation regimensodium phosphate4 L polyethylene glycol as laxative 30 + 15 mL sodium phosphate as a booster
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Completeness rateWithin 3 months after completed capsule colonoscopy

Visualization of the hemorrhoidal plexus or an excreted capsule

Adequate cleanliness rateWithin 3 months after completed capsule colonoscopy

Assessment of the quality of the bowel preparation using a the 4-point Leighton-Rex scale

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Transit timesWithin 3 months after completed capsule colonoscopy

Determining the amount of time for the capsule to transit through the stomach, small bowel and large bowel for the different preparations

Diagnostic yieldWithin 3 months after completed capsule colonoscopy

Findings in the small and large bowel

Assessment of patient tolerance of the bowel preparationsWithin 3 months after completed capsule colonoscopy

Survey questionnaire to be completed by participants at the time of the colon capsule endoscopy assessing the tolerability of the preparation and side effects

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Skåne University Hospital

🇸🇪

Malmö, Sweden

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath