We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
PEG 3350 (Transipeg) versus lactulose in the treatment of childhood functional constipation: a double blind, randomised, controlled, multicentre trial.
Gut 2004 November
BACKGROUND: Recently, polyethylene glycol (PEG 3350) has been suggested as a good alternative laxative to lactulose as a treatment option in paediatric constipation. However, no large randomised controlled trials exist evaluating the efficacy of either laxative.
AIMS: To compare PEG 3350 (Transipeg: polyethylene glycol with electrolytes) with lactulose in paediatric constipation and evaluate clinical efficacy/side effects.
PATIENTS: One hundred patients (aged 6 months-15 years) with paediatric constipation were included in an eight week double blinded, randomised, controlled trial.
METHODS: After faecal disimpaction, patients <6 years of age received PEG 3350 (2.95 g/sachet) or lactulose (6 g/sachet) while children > or =6 years started with 2 sachets/day. Primary outcome measures were: defecation and encopresis frequency/week and successful treatment after eight weeks. Success was defined as a defecation frequency > or =3/week and encopresis < or =1 every two weeks. Secondary outcome measures were side effects after eight weeks of treatment.
RESULTS: A total of 91 patients (49 male) completed the study. A significant increase in defecation frequency (PEG 3350: 3 pre v 7 post treatment/week; lactulose: 3 pre v 6 post/week) and a significant decrease in encopresis frequency (PEG 3350: 10 pre v 3 post/week; lactulose: 8 pre v 3 post/week) was found in both groups (NS). However, success was significantly higher in the PEG group (56%) compared with the lactulose group (29%). PEG 3350 patients reported less abdominal pain, straining, and pain at defecation than children using lactulose. However, bad taste was reported significantly more often in the PEG group.
CONCLUSIONS: PEG 3350 (0.26 (0.11) g/kg), compared with lactulose (0.66 (0.32) g/kg), provided a higher success rate with fewer side effects. PEG 3350 should be the laxative of first choice in childhood constipation.
AIMS: To compare PEG 3350 (Transipeg: polyethylene glycol with electrolytes) with lactulose in paediatric constipation and evaluate clinical efficacy/side effects.
PATIENTS: One hundred patients (aged 6 months-15 years) with paediatric constipation were included in an eight week double blinded, randomised, controlled trial.
METHODS: After faecal disimpaction, patients <6 years of age received PEG 3350 (2.95 g/sachet) or lactulose (6 g/sachet) while children > or =6 years started with 2 sachets/day. Primary outcome measures were: defecation and encopresis frequency/week and successful treatment after eight weeks. Success was defined as a defecation frequency > or =3/week and encopresis < or =1 every two weeks. Secondary outcome measures were side effects after eight weeks of treatment.
RESULTS: A total of 91 patients (49 male) completed the study. A significant increase in defecation frequency (PEG 3350: 3 pre v 7 post treatment/week; lactulose: 3 pre v 6 post/week) and a significant decrease in encopresis frequency (PEG 3350: 10 pre v 3 post/week; lactulose: 8 pre v 3 post/week) was found in both groups (NS). However, success was significantly higher in the PEG group (56%) compared with the lactulose group (29%). PEG 3350 patients reported less abdominal pain, straining, and pain at defecation than children using lactulose. However, bad taste was reported significantly more often in the PEG group.
CONCLUSIONS: PEG 3350 (0.26 (0.11) g/kg), compared with lactulose (0.66 (0.32) g/kg), provided a higher success rate with fewer side effects. PEG 3350 should be the laxative of first choice in childhood constipation.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app