A Phase 4 interventional study of bowel preparation: senna & gastrofin versus picolax (standard) in Colorectal Cancer, sponsored by London North West Healthcare NHS Trust. Withdrawn at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2010-07-26.
Sponsored by London North West Healthcare NHS Trust · Phase 4, Interventional, and Health services research
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.
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.
5,734 studies on the registry are indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms; 1,481 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 150 is above the median of 77 across 4,222 interventional studies indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms.
Browse Colorectal Neoplasms studies →London North West Healthcare NHS Trust is the lead sponsor of 55 studies on the registry; 11 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
gastrofin \& Picolax
Drug: bowel preparation: senna & gastrofin versus picolax (standard)
senna
Drug: bowel preparation: senna & gastrofin versus picolax (standard)
The intervention is a bowel cleansing procedure
Versus standard bowel preparation
Time frame: 1 day (while on regimen + effectivness analysis time)
Patient experience and compliance with reduced laxative tagging versus standard preparation
Time frame: 1 day (while on regimen)
Comparison of per polyp specificity between the two preparation regimens
Time frame: 1 day (analysis time)
The record gives a start of Nov 2007 and a completion of Mar 2009. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is withdrawn, as verified in Jul 2010. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
London North West Healthcare NHS Trust