Background: Bowel preparation represents a significant issue to high-quality colonoscopy. Oral mannitol requires a single dose, is of low volume, and has a pleasant taste and rapid action. Aims: This SATISFACTION study compared single-dose (same day) oral mannitol 100 g/750 mL with standard split-dose PEG-ASC2 L (MoviPrep®). Methods: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with adequate bowel cleansing. Secondary endpoints included efficacy (adenoma detection rate, caecal intubation rate, time of evacuation), safety (intestinal gases concentration, haemato-chemical parameters, adverse events), and patient satisfaction. Results: The study included 703 patients (352 treated with mannitol and 351 with PEG-ASC). Mannitol was not inferior to PEG-ASC for the primary endpoint (91.1 % and 95.5 %, respectively; p-value for the non-inferiority =0.0131). There was no significant difference for secondary efficacy endpoints. The acceptability profile was significantly better in the mannitol group for ease of use, taste, and willingness to reuse (p < 0.0001 for all). The concentration of intestinal gases (H2, CH4) was similar between groups and well below those potentially critical. Conclusions: The SATISFACTION study indicated that low-volume, single-dose mannitol may satisfy an unmet clinical need since it was more acceptable to the patient and not inferior to the split-dose PEG-ASC for bowel cleansing efficacy.

Mannitol for bowel preparation: Efficacy and safety results from the SATISFACTION randomised clinical trial

Cannizzaro, Renato
Membro del Collaboration Group
2025-01-01

Abstract

Background: Bowel preparation represents a significant issue to high-quality colonoscopy. Oral mannitol requires a single dose, is of low volume, and has a pleasant taste and rapid action. Aims: This SATISFACTION study compared single-dose (same day) oral mannitol 100 g/750 mL with standard split-dose PEG-ASC2 L (MoviPrep®). Methods: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with adequate bowel cleansing. Secondary endpoints included efficacy (adenoma detection rate, caecal intubation rate, time of evacuation), safety (intestinal gases concentration, haemato-chemical parameters, adverse events), and patient satisfaction. Results: The study included 703 patients (352 treated with mannitol and 351 with PEG-ASC). Mannitol was not inferior to PEG-ASC for the primary endpoint (91.1 % and 95.5 %, respectively; p-value for the non-inferiority =0.0131). There was no significant difference for secondary efficacy endpoints. The acceptability profile was significantly better in the mannitol group for ease of use, taste, and willingness to reuse (p < 0.0001 for all). The concentration of intestinal gases (H2, CH4) was similar between groups and well below those potentially critical. Conclusions: The SATISFACTION study indicated that low-volume, single-dose mannitol may satisfy an unmet clinical need since it was more acceptable to the patient and not inferior to the split-dose PEG-ASC for bowel cleansing efficacy.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S1590865824010417-main.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.58 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.58 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/3099280
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact