Macrogol 3350 oral powder 8.5g sachets sugar free
Available from a pharmacy with pharmacist advice
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
View EudraVigilance report
Suspected adverse reactions reported for Macrogol 3350
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
1 branded products available
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Macrogol 3350 on the MHRA register
TransiSoft oral powder 8.5g sachets
This is the NHS Drug Tariff indicative price used for reimbursement purposes. It may not reflect the price paid by patients or pharmacies.
View full Drug TariffSource: NHS Drug Tariff via NHSBSA. Derived from dm+d VMPP (Virtual Medicinal Product Pack) pricing data. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
WHO defined daily dose (DDD)
10 gram
Not a recommended dose. The DDD is the assumed average maintenance dose per day for a drug used for its main indication in adults. It is a statistical measure used for research and comparison purposes only.
Source: WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology, distributed via the NHS dm+d supplementary BNF/ATC mapping files (NHSBSA). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
NICE clinical guidance(1)
Source: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. BNF code shown is the factual mapping value distributed by NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) in the dm+d supplementary file under OGL v3.0; it is not affiliated with, nor licensed from, the publishers of the British National Formulary. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 7 · Randomised trials: 10 · 1986–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
D. C. A. Candy, Jonathan Belsey
Archives of Disease in Childhood, 2008
- Constipation
- Fecal Impaction
- Lactulose
R W Chapman, Vincenzo Stanghellini, Mike Geraint, et al.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 2013
- Constipation
- Electrolytes
- Polyethylene Glycols
Harris RG, Neale EP, Batterham M
2025
- Constipation
- Probiotics
- Polyethylene Glycols
ContextThere has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.ObjectiveThe aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.MethodsRCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.ResultsData were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.ConclusionCurrently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registration no.CRD42022360977 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977).
Abstract licence: CC BY
Peter Katelaris, Vasi Naganathan, Ken Liu, et al.
BMC Gastroenterology, 2016
- Constipation
- Electrolytes
- Polyethylene Glycols
Hoilat GJ, Ayas MF, Hoilat JN, et al.
2021
- Hepatic Encephalopathy
- Lactulose
- Liver Cirrhosis
BackgroundHepatic encephalopathy (HE) is defined as brain dysfunction that occurs because of acute liver failure or liver cirrhosis and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Lactulose is the standard of care till this date; however, polyethylene glycol (PEG) has gained the attention of multiple investigators.MethodsWe screened five databases namely PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase from inception to 10 February 2021. Dichotomous and continuous data were analysed using the Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance methods, respectively, which yielded a meta-analysis comparing PEG versus lactulose in the treatment of HE.ResultsFour trials with 229 patients were included. Compared with lactulose, the pooled effect size demonstrated a significantly lower average HE Scoring Algorithm (HESA) Score at 24 hours (Mean difference (MD)=-0.68, 95% CI (-1.05 to -0.31), pConclusionPEG leads to a higher drop in the HESA Score and thus leads to a faster resolution of HE compared with lactulose.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC
Cosby A. Stone, Yiwei Liu, Mary V. Relling, et al.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In Practice, 2018
- Allergens
- Cross Reactions
- Hypersensitivity, Immediate
Sellaturay P, Nasser S, Islam S, et al.
2021
- Drug Hypersensitivity
- Anaphylaxis
- Polyethylene Glycols
K.R.J. Kistemaker, A. de Graeff, M. Crul, et al.
BMC Palliative Care, 2023
- Opioid-Induced Constipation
- Neoplasms
- Analgesics, Opioid
A. Wegner, A. Banaszkiewicz, J. Kierkuś, et al.
Clinics and research in hepatology and gastroenterology, 2018
R. Cinca, D. Chera, H. Gruss, et al.
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 2013
- Benzofurans
- Chronic Disease
- Constipation
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Pharmacology and chemical data from DrugBank
Key facts
Drug status
Approved
Major interactions
None known
Half-life
4.1 hours
Mechanism
Osmotic laxatives contain substances that are poorly absorbable and draw water into the lumen of the bowel.
Food interactions
3 warnings
Human targets
None mapped
Data: DrugBank · CC BY-NC 4.0
Pharmacokinetics at a glance
Absorption
3 hours
Half-life
4.1 hours
Protein binding
Volume of distribution
481 L
[L6421]…
Metabolism
[A18713][A177092]…
Elimination
85%
[L6421]…
Clearance
Pharmacokinetic data: DrugBank · CC BY-NC 4.0
The rationale of using PEG in gastroenterology is due to the physical properties of the compound: its potent water-binding capacity, negligible intestinal absorption with increasing molecular mass, lack of significant toxicity, and limited intestinal enzymatic degradation or bacterial metabolism all make PEG a useful therapeutic agent for the treatment of occasional constipation and bowel cleansing for preparation in colonoscopy.[A18713]
[L11812]
When used in combination with sodium ascorbate, sodium sulfate, ascorbic acid, sodium chloride and potassium chloride, it is used for cleansing of the colon in preparation for colonoscopy in adults.
[L6421]
Known interactions with other medications. Always consult a healthcare professional.
Showing 50 of 450 interactions
[L11857]
There is limited clinical information on the overdose of polyethylene glycols. Based on the pharmacological action of the compound, severe diarrhea may be suspected. Overdose of polyethylene glycols should be responded with symptomatic and supportive care.
How the body processes this drug — absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination
[L6421]
Typically, polyethylene glycols with a high molecular weight are poorly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract following oral administration.
[A190975][A190978]
[L6421]
[L6421]
[A18713][A177092]
[L6421]
Proteins that transport this drug across cell membranes
PMID:2897240 PMID:35970996 PMID:8898203 PMID:9038218 PMID:35507548
Catalyzes the flop of phospholipids from the cytoplasmic to the exoplasmic leaflet of the apical membrane. Participates mainly to the flop of phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylethanolamine, beta-D-glucosylceramides and sphingomyelins .
PMID:8898203
Energy-dependent efflux pump responsible for decreased drug accumulation in multidrug-resistant cells PMID:2897240 PMID:35970996 PMID:9038218
ATC A06AD15
ATC A06AD65
Chemical identifiers
CAS, UNII, InChI Key and database cross-references
Show
Chemical identifiers
CAS, UNII, InChI Key and database cross-references
Linked compound data from DrugBank Open Data (CC BY-NC 4.0)
Polyethylene glycol
Matched from: Macrogol 3350
Additional database identifiers
Drugs Product Database (DPD)
698
Drugs Product Database (DPD)
13418
HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC)
HGNC:40
GenAtlas
ABCB1
GeneCards
ABCB1
GenBank Gene Database
M14758
GenBank Protein Database
307180
Guide to Pharmacology
768
UniProt Accession
MDR1_HUMAN
DrugBank citations
If you use DrugBank data in your research, please cite the following publications:
Show earlier publications
Structured knowledge from the free knowledge base
ATC classifications (Wikidata)
Linked open data from Wikidata (Q410083), a free and open knowledge base operated by the Wikimedia Foundation. Data is available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication.