Tools
Bowel Preparation
Introduction
Clinicians can use a range of methods and efficacies to prepare the bowel for colonoscopy. Colonoscopy is currently the gold standard for imaging the mucosa of the colon to identify any concerning lesions for excision or biopsy. Reviews have shown that rates of incomplete colonoscopies, defined as the inability to achieve cecal intubation and mucosal visualization effectively, have ranged between 10% to 20%.[1][2][3] Poor bowel preparation can lead to failed detection of cancerous lesions and has been associated with an increased risk of procedural adverse events.[3][4]
Many studies have identified risk factors for poor bowel preparation. These risk factors include previous poor bowel preparation, non-English speaking, Medicaid insurance, single, inpatient status, polypharmacy, suffering from obesity, advanced age, male gender, and comorbidities such as diabetes, stroke, dementia, and Parkinson disease.[5][6][7][8][9] Ideal preparation reduces patient discomfort and reduces shifts in fluid and electrolytes. Preparation should be safe, tolerable, and inexpensive.[10]
Anatomy and Physiology
Register For Free And Read The Full Article
Search engine and full access to all medical articles- 10 free questions in your specialty
- Free CME/CE Activities
- Free daily question in your email
- Save favorite articles to your dashboard
- Emails offering discounts
Learn more about a Subscription to StatPearls Point-of-Care
Anatomy and Physiology
Adequate bowel preparation increases the likelihood of identifying lesions during colonoscopy. Colonoscopies are intended to examine the rectum, colon (sigmoid colon, descending colon, transverse colon, ascending colon, and the cecum), and the distal part of the small intestine, the terminal ileum.
Indications
Adequate bowel preparation is indicated when a colonoscopy is needed.
Contraindications
There are certain contraindications to specific bowel preparations, which include but are not limited to:
- Low volume 2-L PEG-ELS with ascorbic acid should be avoided in those with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency.
- PEG-3350 should be avoided in those with electrolyte abnormalities.
- Magnesium citrate should be avoided in those with electrolyte abnormalities such as kidney disease and those with a greater risk of magnesium toxicity.[3]
- Oral sodium sulfate in a single dose has been found to cause increased gastrointestinal (GI) events.[11]
- Sodium phosphate is not recommended as a bowel preparation regimen due to its side effects. It should be avoided in those with renal dysfunction, dehydration, hypercalcemia, hypertension treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker because they have developed phosphate nephropathy.[12] Hyperphosphatemia, elevated blood urea nitrogen, increased plasma osmolality, hypocalcemia, hyponatremia, and seizures have also been documented.[13][14][15][16][17][3]
- The bowel preparation combination of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate is known to have a GI side-effect profile that includes abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting.[3]
- The bowel preparation combination of sodium sulfate and sulfate-free PEG-ELS has been associated with vomiting.[18]
Personnel
The primary care physician or gastroenterologist determines the most appropriate bowel preparation for a patient. Often, the decision can be collaborative because the primary care physician may have greater knowledge regarding medical history that may contraindicate certain bowel regimens. The gastroenterologist is most likely to decide on care because they have more in-depth knowledge about bowel regimens and can educate and instruct the patient on properly administering the regimen. In the inpatient setting, the nursing staff plays a pivotal role in monitoring the patient for complaints, side effects and ensuring complete and proper administration of the regimen.
Preparation
Bowel preparation can be divided into 3 categories: isosmotic, hypoosmotic, and hyperosmotic agents.
Isosmotic agents include high-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparations, low-volume PEG preparations, and sulfate-free PEG-electrolyte solutions (ELS).
- High-volume PEG preparations are osmotically balanced with nonfermentable electrolyte solutions to help prevent fluid and electrolyte shifts. PEG is an inert polymer of ethylene oxide that is designed to pass through the bowel without absorption. High volume PEG preparations consist of 4 L of solution and can be taken either as a single dose or split dose preparation. There is growing evidence that split-dose regimens are superior in bowel preparation.[3][19] High-volume PEG preparations are typically well tolerated; however, nearly 5% to 15% of patients do not complete preparation due to poor palatability and/or large volume.[20] Moreover, it does not change histological features of mucosa and can be used in those patients thought to have inflammatory bowel disease.[21] It can also be used in those with preexisting electrolyte imbalances and those who cannot tolerate high sodium loads, such as those with renal failure, heart failure, or cirrhosis.[22]
- Low-volume PEG preparations were designed to have the same efficacy as high-volume preparations but in a more tolerable amount. The only FDA-approved. low-volume PEG preparation is low -volume, 2-L, PEG-ELS with ascorbic acid.[3] Since this preparation includes ascorbic acid, it must be used with caution in those with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency as the ascorbic acid can exacerbate hemolysis.[23]
- Sulfate-free PEG-ELS was created to improve the smell and taste of PEG-ELS.[24] It is less salty, more palatable, and importantly comparable to PEG-ELS in regards to colonic cleansing, overall tolerance, and safety.[3][25]
Hyposmotic agents include a low-volume PEG preparation called PEG-3350 (PEG-SD) that requires an additional electrolyte solution (sports drink) and is often combined with bisacodyl.[3] The combination of PEG-3350 and an electrolyte solution is not FDA approved for bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy and is not considered equivalent to the isomotic, low-volume, 2-L, PEG-ELS.[3] Numerous studies have found mixed results regarding colonic cleansing and electrolyte abnormalities, such as changes in sodium, potassium, and chlorine(Cl). Some studies have shown that PEG-3350 is more likely to cause electrolyte abnormalities such as hyponatremia than low-volume, 2-L, PEG-ELS.[26]
Hyperosmotic agents include magnesium citrate, oral sodium sulfate, and sodium phosphate.
- Magnesium citrate is a magnesium-containing, osmotically-acting saline solution that also stimulates the release of cholecystokinin, leading to intraluminal fluid and electrolyte shift in the small intestine and possibly the colon. It is not typically recommended as a bowel preparation due to potential magnesium toxicity leading to bradycardia, hypotension, nausea, and drowsiness. Moreover, magnesium is secreted via the kidneys and should be avoided in those patients with kidney disease.[3]
- Oral sodium sulfate has not been associated with significant fluid, or electrolyte shifts thought to be due to the sulfate, a poorly absorbed anion.[3] Although there is limited research on oral sodium sulfate, one study found that oral sodium sulfate was similar to low-volume, 2-L, PEG-ELS with ascorbic acid in bowel preparation. Moreover, compared to 4-L, PEG-ELS preparation, 1-day oral sodium sulfate preparation was associated with increased GI events; however, this was not seen in split-dosed regimens.[11]
- Sodium phosphate is no longer recommended as a bowel preparation regimen due to its serious side effects. Those with renal dysfunction, dehydration, hypercalcemia, or hypertension treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker have had developed phosphate nephropathy.[12] Moreover, it has been associated with hyperphosphatemia, elevated blood urea nitrogen, increased plasma osmolality, hypocalcemia, hyponatremia, and seizures.[14][15][16][17] Given many of these adverse effects, the FDA has issued a warning for the prescription tablet form of sodium phosphate.[3][15]
There are also combination agents such as sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate and sodium sulfate/sulfate-free PEG-ELS that have been used for bowel preparation.
- Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate acts dually as a stimulant laxative to increase the force and frequency of peristalsis by sodium picosulfate and as an osmotic laxative to retain fluid in the colon by the magnesium citrate component.[27] Side effects are typically GI-related, such as abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting.[3]
- Sodium sulfate and sulfate-free PEG-ELS combination typically consist of oral sodium sulfate and 2 L of sulfate-free PEG-ELS.[3] In a study comparing split dosed administration of this combination to low-volume, 2-L, PEG-ELS with ascorbic acid, both bowel preparation regimens had successful bowel preparation, but the combination of sodium sulfate and sulfate-free PEG-ELS was associated with higher rates of vomiting.[3][18]
The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) was developed to assess bowel preparation after all cleaning maneuvers. Each segment of the colon, the right colon, transverse colon, and left colon are assigned points from 0 to 3 with regards to the cleanliness of the colon.[28] A score of 0 includes an unprepared colon, 1 includes those in which only a portion of the mucosa of the colon segment is visible, 2 includes those with a minor amount of residual staining and small fragments of stool present. Lastly, 3 includes those where the entire mucosa of the colon is seen well with no residual stool. Each segment of the colon is assigned a score, and the entire colon is assigned a cumulative score.[28] Higher scores indicate better preparation.
Technique or Treatment
Bowel preparation can be given in a single dose or a split dose. A higher quality bowel preparation and increased adenoma detection rate have been demonstrated in those taking a split dosed bowel preparation.[3][29] Typically, the first dose should be taken the day before the procedure and the second dose is taken 3 to 8 hours before the start of the colonoscopy.[3][30][31]
Clinical Significance
Poor bowel preparation can be a potentially severe limitation on the usefulness of colonoscopies. Proper bowel preparation leads to clean identifiable mucosa, and as a result, there is a greater ability to detect polyps and other lesions. Contrary, poor bowel preparation can potentially cause missed identification of lesions or polyps that can have morbidity and mortality effects on the individual.
Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes
Interprofessional care for a patient undergoing bowel preparation is vital to ensure better preparation and colonoscopy outcomes. An interprofessional team consists of a primary care physician, gastroenterologist, nurses, and a pharmacist. With a team-based approach, a proper bowel preparation regimen can be selected based on the patient's medical history and potential side effects. A single dose versus a split-dose regimen can be selected to accommodate the patient's lifestyle.
One study found that the utility of telephone reeducation about bowel preparation the day before a colonoscopy significantly improved the quality of bowel preparation and the rate of polyp detection.[32] [Level I]
References
Mitchell RM, McCallion K, Gardiner KR, Watson RG, Collins JS. Successful colonoscopy; completion rates and reasons for incompletion. The Ulster medical journal. 2002 May:71(1):34-7 [PubMed PMID: 12137162]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceShah HA, Paszat LF, Saskin R, Stukel TA, Rabeneck L. Factors associated with incomplete colonoscopy: a population-based study. Gastroenterology. 2007 Jun:132(7):2297-303 [PubMed PMID: 17570204]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Saltzman JR, Cash BD, Pasha SF, Early DS, Muthusamy VR, Khashab MA, Chathadi KV, Fanelli RD, Chandrasekhara V, Lightdale JR, Fonkalsrud L, Shergill AK, Hwang JH, Decker GA, Jue TL, Sharaf R, Fisher DA, Evans JA, Foley K, Shaukat A, Eloubeidi MA, Faulx AL, Wang A, Acosta RD. Bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2015 Apr:81(4):781-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.048. Epub 2015 Jan 14 [PubMed PMID: 25595062]
Wexner SD, Beck DE, Baron TH, Fanelli RD, Hyman N, Shen B, Wasco KE, American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. A consensus document on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: prepared by a task force from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2006 Jun:63(7):894-909 [PubMed PMID: 16733101]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceRex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S, Levin TR, Burt RW, Johnson DA, Kirk LM, Litlin S, Lieberman DA, Waye JD, Church J, Marshall JB, Riddell RH, U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2002 Jun:97(6):1296-308 [PubMed PMID: 12094842]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceRex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, Chak A, Cohen J, Deal SE, Hoffman B, Jacobson BC, Mergener K, Petersen BT, Safdi MA, Faigel DO, Pike IM, ASGE/ACG Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2006 Apr:101(4):873-85 [PubMed PMID: 16635231]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceChokshi RV, Hovis CE, Hollander T, Early DS, Wang JS. Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2012 Jun:75(6):1197-203. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005. Epub 2012 Feb 28 [PubMed PMID: 22381531]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceHassan C, Fuccio L, Bruno M, Pagano N, Spada C, Carrara S, Giordanino C, Rondonotti E, Curcio G, Dulbecco P, Fabbri C, Della Casa D, Maiero S, Simone A, Iacopini F, Feliciangeli G, Manes G, Rinaldi A, Zullo A, Rogai F, Repici A. A predictive model identifies patients most likely to have inadequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2012 May:10(5):501-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.12.037. Epub 2012 Jan 10 [PubMed PMID: 22239959]
Nguyen DL, Wieland M. Risk factors predictive of poor quality preparation during average risk colonoscopy screening: the importance of health literacy. Journal of gastrointestinal and liver diseases : JGLD. 2010 Dec:19(4):369-72 [PubMed PMID: 21188326]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceDiPalma JA, Brady CE 3rd. Colon cleansing for diagnostic and surgical procedures: polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution. The American journal of gastroenterology. 1989 Sep:84(9):1008-16 [PubMed PMID: 2672787]
Di Palma JA, Rodriguez R, McGowan J, Cleveland Mv. A randomized clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new, reduced-volume, oral sulfate colon-cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2009 Sep:104(9):2275-84. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.389. Epub 2009 Jul 7 [PubMed PMID: 19584830]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceMarkowitz GS, Stokes MB, Radhakrishnan J, D'Agati VD. Acute phosphate nephropathy following oral sodium phosphate bowel purgative: an underrecognized cause of chronic renal failure. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN. 2005 Nov:16(11):3389-96 [PubMed PMID: 16192415]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceGremse DA, Sacks AI, Raines S. Comparison of oral sodium phosphate to polyethylene glycol-based solution for bowel preparation for colonoscopy in children. Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition. 1996 Dec:23(5):586-90 [PubMed PMID: 8985850]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceLieberman DA, Ghormley J, Flora K. Effect of oral sodium phosphate colon preparation on serum electrolytes in patients with normal serum creatinine. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 1996 May:43(5):467-9 [PubMed PMID: 8726759]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceClarkston WK, Tsen TN, Dies DF, Schratz CL, Vaswani SK, Bjerregaard P. Oral sodium phosphate versus sulfate-free polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution in outpatient preparation for colonoscopy: a prospective comparison. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 1996 Jan:43(1):42-8 [PubMed PMID: 8903817]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceHolte K, Nielsen KG, Madsen JL, Kehlet H. Physiologic effects of bowel preparation. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 2004 Aug:47(8):1397-402 [PubMed PMID: 15484356]
Frizelle FA, Colls BM. Hyponatremia and seizures after bowel preparation: report of three cases. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 2005 Feb:48(2):393-6 [PubMed PMID: 15812590]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceRex DK, McGowan J, Cleveland Mv, Di Palma JA. A randomized, controlled trial of oral sulfate solution plus polyethylene glycol as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2014 Sep:80(3):482-91. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.03.043. Epub 2014 May 13 [PubMed PMID: 24830577]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceEnestvedt BK, Tofani C, Laine LA, Tierney A, Fennerty MB. 4-Liter split-dose polyethylene glycol is superior to other bowel preparations, based on systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2012 Nov:10(11):1225-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.08.029. Epub 2012 Aug 30 [PubMed PMID: 22940741]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceMarshall JB, Pineda JJ, Barthel JS, King PD. Prospective, randomized trial comparing sodium phosphate solution with polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage for colonoscopy preparation. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 1993 Sep-Oct:39(5):631-4 [PubMed PMID: 8224683]
Level 1 (high-level) evidencePockros PJ, Foroozan P. Golytely lavage versus a standard colonoscopy preparation. Effect on normal colonic mucosal histology. Gastroenterology. 1985 Feb:88(2):545-8 [PubMed PMID: 3965343]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceMarschall HU, Bartels F. Life-threatening complications of nasogastric administration of polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solutions (Golytely) for bowel cleansing. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 1998 May:47(5):408-10 [PubMed PMID: 9609437]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceRees DC, Kelsey H, Richards JD. Acute haemolysis induced by high dose ascorbic acid in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency. BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 1993 Mar 27:306(6881):841-2 [PubMed PMID: 8490379]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceFordtran JS, Santa Ana CA, Cleveland MvB. A low-sodium solution for gastrointestinal lavage. Gastroenterology. 1990 Jan:98(1):11-6 [PubMed PMID: 2293568]
DiPalma JA, Marshall JB. Comparison of a new sulfate-free polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution versus a standard solution for colonoscopy cleansing. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 1990 May-Jun:36(3):285-9 [PubMed PMID: 2365214]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceMatro R, Daskalakis C, Negoianu D, Katz L, Henry C, Share M, Kastenberg D. Randomised clinical trial: Polyethylene glycol 3350 with sports drink vs. polyethylene glycol with electrolyte solution as purgatives for colonoscopy--the incidence of hyponatraemia. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2014 Sep:40(6):610-9. doi: 10.1111/apt.12884. Epub 2014 Jul 28 [PubMed PMID: 25066025]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceHoy SM, Scott LJ, Wagstaff AJ. Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate: a review of its use as a colorectal cleanser. Drugs. 2009:69(1):123-36. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200969010-00009. Epub [PubMed PMID: 19192941]
Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2009 Mar:69(3 Pt 2):620-5. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057. Epub 2009 Jan 10 [PubMed PMID: 19136102]
Gurudu SR, Ramirez FC, Harrison ME, Leighton JA, Crowell MD. Increased adenoma detection rate with system-wide implementation of a split-dose preparation for colonoscopy. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2012 Sep:76(3):603-8.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.04.456. Epub 2012 Jun 23 [PubMed PMID: 22732876]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceBryant RV, Schoeman SN, Schoeman MN. Shorter preparation to procedure interval for colonoscopy improves quality of bowel cleansing. Internal medicine journal. 2013 Feb:43(2):162-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2012.02963.x. Epub [PubMed PMID: 22998352]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceSeo EH, Kim TO, Park MJ, Joo HR, Heo NY, Park J, Park SH, Yang SY, Moon YS. Optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy interval in split-dose PEG bowel preparation determines satisfactory bowel preparation quality: an observational prospective study. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2012 Mar:75(3):583-90. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.029. Epub 2011 Dec 15 [PubMed PMID: 22177570]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceLiu X, Luo H, Zhang L, Leung FW, Liu Z, Wang X, Huang R, Hui N, Wu K, Fan D, Pan Y, Guo X. Telephone-based re-education on the day before colonoscopy improves the quality of bowel preparation and the polyp detection rate: a prospective, colonoscopist-blinded, randomised, controlled study. Gut. 2014 Jan:63(1):125-30. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-304292. Epub 2013 Mar 16 [PubMed PMID: 23503044]
Level 1 (high-level) evidence