Skip to content

Comparison of Bowel Preparation in Virtual Colonoscopy (VC) - Patient Experience

Virtual Colonoscopy: Comparison of Reduced Laxative Virtual Colonoscopy Regimens With Standard Preparation on Patient Experience and Compliance - a Questionnaire Based Study

Status
Withdrawn
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00460837
Enrollment
150
Registered
2007-04-17
Start date
2007-11-30
Completion date
2009-03-31
Last updated
2010-07-26

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Colorectal Cancer

Keywords

colorectal cancer, bowel preparation regimen, patients with symptoms attributable to colorectal cancer

Brief summary

The study will compare patient's experience between those taking a standard bowel cleansing regimen with minimal laxative tagging regimen of senna and gastrofin. Additionally comparing any possible reduction in diagnostic accuracy that may ensue from an increased quantity of retained faecal residue.

Detailed description

Bowel cleansing with high dose laxative is the standard bowel preparation prior to whole colon investigations but such regimens are associated with considerable patient discomfort and inconvenience, potentially affecting compliance rates \[1-3\]. Unlike existing whole colon investigations (conventional colonoscopy and barium enema), reduced laxative regimens can be successfully used with VC, with the aim of improving patient experience, whilst maintaining diagnostic accuracy. These regimens utilize faecal tagging; a method of labeling residual faeces and fluid with radiodense liquids, such as iodine or barium based fluids, which are taken orally by the patient. Once faecal residue and fluid is labeled in this way, it can easily be discriminated from true pathology (which remains 'untagged'). We are proposing to compare different bowel preparation regimens, and ascertain patient experience of the different regimes, while monitoring diagnostic accuracy of the 2 different regiments.

Interventions

DRUGbowel preparation: senna & gastrofin versus picolax (standard)

The intervention is a bowel cleansing procedure

Sponsors

London North West Healthcare NHS Trust
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* patients with symptoms attributable to colorectal cancer

Exclusion criteria

* patients with known colorectal cancer referred for staging VC * patients who take laxatives regularly or with previous inadequate colonic examination due to excessive faecal residue * patients deemed too frail to undergo full bowel preparation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Versus standard bowel preparation1 day (while on regimen + effectivness analysis time)
Patient experience and compliance with reduced laxative tagging versus standard preparation1 day (while on regimen)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Comparison of per polyp specificity between the two preparation regimens1 day (analysis time)

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026