Search

Background: Three liters of polyethylene glycol administered in a split dose is a commonly recommended regimen for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the quality and tolerability of low-dose (2 L) polyethylene glycol combined with linaclotide (2 L+L) versus the 3 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) bowel preparation regimen. Design: A noninferiority, prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Methods: In this noninferiority, prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled study, patients scheduled for colonoscopy were enrolled and randomized to receive a 3 L PEG or 2L PEG+L regimen. The quality of bowel preparation and patients' discomfort was assessed. Results: Over 12 months, 458 patients were randomized into 3 L PEG and 2 L+L groups. The primary endpoints showed that the 2 L+L regimen was superior to the 3L PEG regimen in overall bowel cleansing scores (Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale: 3.3 ± 2.1 vs 3.7 ± 2.1, p = 0.021), but no significant difference in adequate bowel preparation rate between the two groups according to the OBPS score (97% vs 97.4%, p = 0.791). Before colonoscopy, patients in the 2 L +L regimen group had lower bloating scores (0.5 (0, 2) vs 1 (0, 3), p = 0.013), discomfort scores (1 (0, 2) vs 1 (0, 3), p = 0.006), and intolerability scores (1 (0, 3) vs 2 (0, 4), p = 0.016) than did those in the 3L PEG group. Conclusion: Two liters of polyethylene glycol combined with linaclotide may be an alternative regimen to 3 L of PEG taken in split doses for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Trial registration: ChiCTR2100041992. Plain language summary: Improvement in bowel preparation efficacy and patients' discomfort after polyethylene glycol (2 L) combined with linaclotide. The commonly recommended intestinal cleanser regimen is 3 L of polyethylene glycol, which achieves cleansing of the intestinal segments but may give discomfort to the patients. We have conducted a noninferiority, prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to compare 2 L polyethylene glycol+ linaclotide and 3 L polyethylene glycol. The results showed that similar patients' percentage had adequate bowel preparation rate in two groups according to the OBPS score. However, the 2 L+L regimen was superior to the 3 L PEG regimen in overall bowel cleansing scores and patients' discomfort. Trial registration number: ChiCTR2100041992. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/objectives:To date, no studies have evaluated Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) as a large language model chatbot in optical applications for digestive endoscopy images. This study aimed to weigh the performance of ChatGPT-4 in assessing bowel preparation (BP) quality for colonoscopy. Methods: ChatGPT-4 analysed 663 anonymised endoscopic images, scoring each according to the Boston BP scale (BBPS). Expert physicians scored the same images subsequently. Results: ChatGPT-4 deemed 369 frames (62.9%) to be adequately prepared (i.e., BBPS > 1) compared to 524 frames (89.3%) assessed by human assessors. The agreement was slight (κ: 0.099, p = 0.0001). The raw human BBPS score was higher at 3 (2–3) than that of ChatGPT-4 at 2 (1–3), demonstrating moderate concordance (W: 0.554, p = 0.036). Conclusions: ChatGPT-4 demonstrates some potential in assessing BP on colonoscopy images, but further refinement is still needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several randomized clinical trials comparing different bowel preparations (BP) have shown similar efficacy; however, there is a lack of real-world studies on this topic. This study aims to identify the most effective BP regimen in a real-world setting and any predictors of inadequate BP. A retrospective single-center study was conducted over 14 months at an academic hospital including outpatient colonoscopies in which adult patients did not teach on how to perform BP before colonoscopy. Colonoscopies with 1L-PEG, 2L-PEG and picosulphate mixtures were considered. A multivariable analysis for factors associated to poor BP was fitted. Overall, 1779 patients (51 %F, 60±14) years were included. The 1L-PEG regimen provided a higher rate of BP adequacy at multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 2.30, 95 %CI 1.67–3.16, p < 0.001) and was associated with higher median Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score (p < 0.001), higher rate of right-colon cleansing (p < 0.001) and exam completion (p = 0.04). Furthermore, we identified male sex, history of constipation, active smoking, previous pelvic surgery, concomitant psychiatric/neurological or chronic kidney diseases as predictors of inadequate BP. This is the largest real-world study comparing 1L-PEG to other BP regimens. Our results suggest 1L-PEG provides better BP in a non-controlled setting, improving clinical practice quality and minimizing the need for repeated colonoscopies and saving healthcare resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Patients on antithrombotic drugs (ATs) are often screened for CRC, but the effect of ATs on FIT results is controversial. Methods: We divided individuals with FIT‐positive results into two groups, patients treated with and without ATs, and retrospectively compared invasive CRC rates, advanced neoplasia detection rates (ANDRs), adenoma detection rates (ADRs), and polyp detection rates (PDRs) between the two groups. We evaluated the factors influencing the FIT positive predictive value (PPV) using propensity matching, adjusting for age, sex, and bowel preparation. Results: We enrolled 2327 individuals (54.9% male; mean age, 66.7 ± 12.7 years). We grouped 463 individuals into the AT user group and 1864 into the nonuser group. Patients in the AT user group were significantly older and more likely to be male. After propensity score matching for age, sex, and Boston bowel preparation scale, the ADR and PDR in the AT user group were significantly lower than those in the nonuser group. Univariate logistic analysis revealed that multiple AT use (odds ratio [OR]:.39, p < 0.001) had the lowest OR for FIT PPV, followed by age‐ and sex‐adjusted factors for the ADR and any AT use (OR:.67, p = 0.0007). No significant factors related to AT use were observed among age‐adjusted predictive factors for invasive CRC, but warfarin use was a borderline significant positive predictive factor (OR: 2.23, p = 0.059). Conclusion: AT use may not affect the PPV for detecting invasive CRC in patients with positive FIT results, but warfarin may have an impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Adequate bowel preparation is paramount for a high-quality screening colonoscopy. Despite the importance of adequate bowel preparation, there is a lack of large studies that associated the degree of bowel preparation with long-term colorectal cancer outcomes in screening patients. METHODS: In a large population-based screening program database in Austria, quality of bowel preparation was estimated according to the Aronchick Scale by the endoscopist (excellent, good, fair, poor, and inadequate bowel preparation). We used logistic regression to assess the influence of bowel preparation on the detection of different polyp types and the interphysician variation in bowel preparation scoring. Time-to-event analyses were performed to investigate the association of bowel preparation with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) death. RESULTS: A total of 335,466 colonoscopies between January 2012 and follow-up until December 2022 were eligible for the analyses. As compared with excellent bowel preparation, adenoma detection was not significantly lower for good bowel preparation (odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9971-1.0329, P 5 0.1023); however, adenoma detection was significantly lower in fair bowel preparation (odds ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.9408-0.9939, P 5 0.0166). Individuals who had fair or lower bowel preparation at screening colonoscopy had significantly higher hazards for PCCRC death (hazard ratio for fair bowel preparation 2.56, 95% CI 1.67-3.94, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Fair bowel preparation on the Aronchick Scale was not only associated with a lower adenoma detection probability but also with increased risk of PCCRC death. Efforts should be made to increase bowel cleansing above fair scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: The compliance and timeliness of oral laxatives have always been the key factors restricting bowel preparation (BP). We have constructed a novel enhanced‐educational content and process based on social software (SS) for BP to optimize these issues. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted at 13 hospitals in China from December 2019 to December 2020. A total of 1774 enrollees received standard instructions for BP and were randomly assigned (1:1) to the SS group (SSG) that received a smartphone‐based enhanced‐education strategy starting 4 h before colonoscopy or the control group (CG). Results: A total of 3034 consecutive outpatient colonoscopy patients were assessed for eligibility, and 1774 were enrolled and randomly assigned. Ultimately, data from 1747 (SSG vs CG: 875 vs 872) enrollees were collected. The BP adequacy rate was 92.22% (95% CI: 90.46–93.98) in the SSG vs 88.05% (95% CI: 85.91–90.18) in the CG (P = 0.005), and the total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores (6.89 ± 1.15 vs 6.67 ± 1.15, P < 0.001) of those in the SSG were significantly higher than those in the CG. The average number of polyps detected in the SSG was considerably higher than that in the CG (0.84 ± 2.00 vs 0.53 ± 1.19, P = 0.037), and the average diameter of the polyps was significantly lower than that of the control group (4.0 ± 2.5 vs 4.9 ± 3.7, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This SS‐enhanced education strategy can improve the BP adequacy rate and increase the average number of polyps detected, especially those of small diameter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Information on effective bowel preparation (BP) methods for patients with constipation is limited. We recently reported the efficacy of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc) combined with senna for BP; however, this regimen was insufficient in patients with constipation. We hypothesized that the addition of linaclotide, which is approved for the treatment of chronic constipation, to 1 L PEG-Asc would yield results superior to those of senna in patients with constipation. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center study that included outpatients with constipation who underwent BP prior to colonoscopy between March and December 2019 (receiving 1 L PEG-Asc with 24 mg senna) and between January and October 2020 (receiving 1 L PEG-Asc with 500 mg linaclotide). Results: A total of 543 patients with constipation were included, of whom 269 received linaclotide and 274 received senna. The rate of inadequate BP was significantly lower (11% vs 20%, p < 0.01) and the adenoma detection rate was significantly higher (54% vs 45%, p = 0.04) in the linaclotide group than in the senna group. Multivariate analysis revealed that the linaclotide regimen significantly reduced the risk of inadequate BP (odds ratio = 0.36, 95% confidence interval = 0.21–0.60, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The linaclotide regimen significantly increased BP efficacy and the adenoma detection rate compared with the senna regimen without reducing tolerability and is therefore a promising new option for BP in patients with constipation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is essential for visualisation of the colon during colonoscopy. Previous studies have identified changes in gut microbiota composition after MBP and colonoscopy. Considering the gut microbiota is increasingly implicated in psychiatry, we explored the potential impact of this intervention on mood and the microbiota–gut–brain axis. We conducted a pre–post intervention study in adults, with timepoints of one week before and one month after MBP and colonoscopy. Our primary outcome was change in average Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression sub-scores. We examined changes in average anxiety, stress, and quality of life scores and gut microbiota composition using 16S rRNA sequencing. We further explored associations between changes in depressive symptoms and gut microbiota and conducted post hoc analyses to explore potential effect modifiers. Average depressive symptom scores decreased one month post-procedure compared to baseline (n = 59; adjusted β = −0.64; 95%CI: −1.18, −0.11). Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) appeared to moderate this relationship (β = 1.78; 95%CI: 0.292, 3.26); depressive symptoms increased in those with, and decreased in those without, IBS. Reduced alpha diversity, modest effects on beta-diversity, and increases in health-associated genera were observed one month post-procedure. Increases in the CLR-transformed abundances of Ruminococcaceae UCG-009 were associated with improvements in depressive symptoms. There is preliminary evidence of a potential mental health effect of MBP and colonoscopy, particularly for those with IBS, which may be associated with changes to the gut microbiota. Further research is required to confirm these findings and their clinical relevance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: The ideal bowel cleansing program still needs to be explored. The aim was to compare the bowel cleansing effect and patient tolerance of low-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) combined with different doses of linaclotide in fractionated bowel preparation. Methods: The subjects were randomly assigned to the 3LPEG group, 2LPEG + 2L group, or 2LPEG + L group. The primary outcome was to use the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS) to evaluate the efficacy of bowel cleansing, and the secondary outcomes were the detection rate of adenomas and polyps, adverse reactions, tolerance, and defecation dynamics; subsets of patients with chronic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome were also analyzed. Results: A total of 753 patients were randomly assigned. In ITT analysis, the success of preparation of the 2LPEG + 2L group was better than that of the 2LPEG + L group or the 3LPEG group (92.0% vs. 82.3% vs. 82.1%; P = 0.002). Compared with the 3LPEG group, the 2LPEG + L group showed similar but non-inferior results (82.3% vs. 82.1%, P > 0.05). The 2LPEG + 2L group was similar to the 2LPEG + L group in terms of adverse reaction, tolerance, willingness to reuse, and sleep quality, but both were superior to the 3LPEG group. In a subgroup analysis of chronic constipation, the 2LPEG + 2L group had the best cleansing effect on the right colon and mid colon, while in the subgroup analysis of irritable bowel syndrome, the tolerance was better in the 2LPEG + 2L group and the 2LPEG + L group than the 3LPEG group. Conclusions: 2LPEG + 2L is a feasible bowel preparation regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim Methods Results Conclusion Colonoscopy plays a crucial role in the early diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer. Adequate bowel preparation is essential for clear visualization of the colonic mucosa and lesion detection. However, inadequate bowel preparation is common in patients with constipation, and there is no standardized preparation protocol for these patients. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness and tolerability of a pre‐colonoscopy combination regimen of linaclotide and polyethylene glycol (PEG).In this prospective, single‐center, randomized controlled trial, 322 participants were divided into two groups: a 3‐L PEG + 870‐μg linaclotide group (administered as a single dose for 3 days) and a 4‐L PEG group. The primary endpoints were the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score and the rate of adequate and excellent bowel preparation. Secondary endpoints were the rates of detection of colonic adenomas and polyps, cecal intubation rates, colonoscopy time, adverse reactions, patient satisfaction, and physician satisfaction.The study included 319 patients. The 3‐L PEG + linaclotide group showed significantly higher rates of adequate and excellent bowel preparation than the 4‐L PEG group (89.4% vs 73.6% and 37.5% vs 25.3%, respectively; P < 0.05). The mean BBPS score for the right colon in the 3‐L PEG + linaclotide group was significantly higher than that in the 4‐L PEG group. There were no significant between‐group differences regarding the detection rates of colonic polyps and adenomas (44.4% vs 37.7% and 23.1% vs 20.1%, respectively; P > 0.05). There were no significant between‐group differences regarding cecal intubation rates, colonoscopy operation, and withdrawal times. However, patient tolerance and sleep quality were better in the 3‐L PEG + linaclotide group.The combination of 3‐L PEG and 870‐μg linaclotide, because of its lower volume of intake, can be considered as an alternative bowel preparation regimen for constipated patients undergoing colonoscopy, especially for the elderly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is robust evidence to indicate a strong correlation between the bowel preparation status and adenoma detection rate (ADR), which directly impacts the incidence and mortality rate of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer. Therefore, improving bowel preparation has been of increasing interest. In Japan, commercially available bowel preparation agents include polyethylene glycol, oral sodium sulfate, sodium picosulfate‐magnesium citrate, magnesium citrate, and oral sodium phosphate; each has its own strengths and limitations. The timing of administration can also influence the efficacy of bowel preparation and patient tolerability. Furthermore, meta‐analyses have suggested predictive factors for inadequate bowel preparation. A detailed understanding of these factors could contribute to reducing the need for repeat colonoscopy within 1 year, as recommended for patients with inadequate bowel preparation. Recent advancements, such as oral sulfate tablets, present promising alternatives with higher patient satisfaction and ADRs than traditional methods. Achieving optimal bowel preparation requires enhanced instructions, individualized regimens, and a comprehensive understanding of patient backgrounds and the characteristics of various bowel preparation agents. This article provides a concise overview of the current status and advancements in bowel preparation for enhancing the quality and safety of colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate the efficacy of oral Danning tablets for bowel preparation for colonoscopy in diabetes mellitus patients. Methods A study was conducted from November 2022 to May 2024, 100 type 2 diabetic patients (aged≥30 years) admitted to endocrinology department in our hospital were selected and scheduled for colonoscopy as research subjects. These patients were randomly divided into two groups: ① A control group (n=50), received 68.56 g of polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder 10 hours before the colonoscopy and an additional 137.12 g six hours before the procedure. ② An experimental group (n=50), in addition to the bowel preparation regimen of the control group, orally took Danning tablets three times daily, five tablets each time, starting two days before the colonoscopy. Results The experimental group had a BBPS score of (7.44±1.03), which was higher than the control group’s BBPS score of (5.58±1.98), P<0.001. In the experimental group, 96% of the bowel preparations were rated as excellent or good (BBPS score≥6), significantly higher than the 58% in the control group (P<0.001). Conclusion In diabetic patients undergoing colonoscopy, oral administration of Danning tablets during bowel preparation could improve bowel cleanliness and significantly enhance the quality of bowel preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Effective colonoscopy is considered accurate and safe when there is good quality bowel preparation. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an abdominal vibration stimulation program on the quality of bowel preparation in patients undergoing screening and surveillance colonoscopy. Design: This study was a single-centre, randomised, controlled trial. Methods: The participants consisted of 72 patients who received elective in-patient screening and surveillance colonoscopy at a tertiary hospital in central Thailand. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: an experimental group (n=38) and a control group (n=34). Both groups received the same bowel cleansing regimen of 90 ml split-dose sodium phosphate solution. The experimental group received the abdominal vibration stimulation. General surgeons, who were blinded to which group participants were assigned, evaluated the bowel preparation of all participants using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Results: The experimental group showed a statistically significant higher mean score on the BBPS than the control group (p=0.049). The BBPS score for the colon and rectum as a whole of the experimental group was 7.21 ± 1.80 and for the control group was 6.29 ± 2.08. Conclusion: The addition of abdominal vibration stimulation can improve the quality of bowel preparation in patients undergoing screening and surveillance colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging evidence suggests that the human vermiform appendix is not a vestigial organ but rather an immunological organ of biological relevance. It is hypothesised that the appendix acts as a bacterial 'safe house' for commensal gut bacteria and facilitates re-inoculation of the colon after disruption through the release of biofilms. To date, no studies have attempted to explore this potential mechanistic function of the appendix. We conducted a pre-post intervention study in adults (n = 59) exploring re-establishment of the gut microbiota in those with and without an appendix after colonic disruption via bowel preparation and colonoscopy. Gut microbiota composition was measured one week before and one month after bowel preparation and colonoscopy using 16S rRNA sequencing. We observed between group differences in gut microbiota composition between those with (n = 45) and without (n = 13) an appendix at baseline. These differences were no longer evident one-month post-procedure, suggesting that this procedure may have 'reset' any potential appendix-related differences between groups. Both groups experienced reductions in gut microbiota richness and shifts in beta diversity post-procedure, with greater changes in those without an appendix, and there were five bacterial genera whose re-establishment post-procedure appeared to be moderated by appendicectomy status. This small experimental study provides preliminary evidence of a potential differential re-establishment of the gut microbiota after disruption in those with and without an appendix, warranting further investigation into the potential role of the appendix as a microbial safe house. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Adequate bowel preparation (BP) is crucial for the diagnosis of colorectal diseases. Identifying patients at risk of inadequate BP allows for targeted interventions and improved outcomes. We aimed to develop a model for predicting inadequate BP based on preparation-related factors. Methods: Adult outpatients scheduled for colonoscopy between May 2022 and October 2022 were enrolled. One set (N = 913) was used to develop and internally validate the predictive model. The primary predictive model was displayed as a nomogram and then modified into a novel scoring system, which was externally validated in an independent set (N = 177). Inadequate BP was defined as a Boston Bowel Preparedness Scale (BBPS) score of less than 2 for any colonic segment. The model was evaluated by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Independent factors included in the prediction model were stool frequency ≤ 5 (15 points), preparation-to-colonoscopy interval ≥ 5 h (15 points), incomplete dosage (100 points), non-split dose (90 points), unrestricted diet (88 points), no additional water intake (15 points), and last stool appearance as an opaque liquid (0–80 points). The training set exhibited the following performance metrics for identifying BP failure: area under the curve (AUC) of 0.818, accuracy (ACC) of 0.818, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) of 2.397, negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of 0.162, positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.850, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.723. In the internal validation set, these metrics were 0.747, 0.776, 2.099, 0.278, 0.866, and 0.538, respectively. The external validation set showed values of 0.728, 0.757, 2.10, 0.247, 0.782, and 0.704, respectively, indicating strong discriminative ability. Calibration curves demonstrated close agreement, and DCA indicated superior clinical benefits at a threshold probability of 0.73 in the training cohort and 0.75 in the validation cohort for this model. Conclusions: This novel scoring system was developed from a prospective study and externally validated in an independent set based on 7 easily accessible variables, demonstrating robust performance in predicting inadequate BP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to compare oral sulfate solution (OSS) with polyethylene glycol (PEG) for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Methods: A literature search was performed on PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Databases for randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing OSS with PEG for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. The last search was performed on 22 August 2023. The primary outcome was the quality of bowel preparation. The outcomes were compared by meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). Results: A total of 14 RCTs with 4526 patients were included. OSS was comparable with PEG regarding adequate bowel preparation [P = 0.16, odds ratio (OR) = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.93, 1.51], I2 = 0%]. However, OSS showed obvious priority in excellent bowel preparation (P < 0.001, OR = 1.62, 95% CI [1.27, 2.05], I2 = 0%) and total Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) [P = 0.02, weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.27, 95% CI [0.05, 0.50], I2 = 84%]. Additionally, the detection rate of polyps (P = 0.001, OR = 1.44, 95% CI [1.15, 1.80], I2 = 0%) and adenoma (P = 0.007, OR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.06, 1.42], I2 = 0%) was significantly higher in the OSS group. The two groups showed comparable incidence of adverse events except for a higher incidence of dizziness (P = 0.02, OR = 1.74, 95% CI [1.08, 2.83], I2 = 11%) was indicated in the OSS group. Moreover, OSS was associated with a higher satisfaction score (P = 0.02, WMD = 0.62, 95% CI [0.09, 1.15], I2 = 70%). In the TSA, the cumulative Z-curve crossed both the conventional boundary and trial sequential monitoring boundary and the required information size has been reached for excellent bowel preparation and total BBPS. Conclusion: The current data demonstrated that OSS was associated with better quality of bowel preparation. More clinical trials are still needed to confirm other outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Long-time follow-up of sigmoidoscopy screening trials has shown reduced incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC), but inadequate bowel cleansing may hamper efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of bowel cleansing quality in sigmoidoscopy screening. Individuals 50 to 74 years old who had a screening sigmoidoscopy in a population-based Norwegian, randomized trial between 2012 and 2019, were included in this cross-sectional study. The bowel cleansing quality was categorised as excellent, good, partly poor, or poor. The effect of bowel cleansing quality on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and referral to colonoscopy was evaluated by fitting multivariable logistic regression models. 35,710 individuals were included. The bowel cleansing at sigmoidoscopy was excellent in 20,934 (58.6%) individuals, good in 6580 (18.4%), partly poor in 7097 (19.9%) and poor in 1099 (3.1%). The corresponding ADRs were 17.0%, 16.6%, 14.5%, and 13.0%. Compared to participants with excellent bowel cleansing, those with poor bowel cleansing had an odds ratio for adenoma detection of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.55–0.79). We found substantial differences in the assessment of bowel cleansing quality among endoscopists. Inadequate bowel cleansing reduces the efficacy of sigmoidoscopy screening, by lowering ADR. A validated rating scale and improved bowel preparation are needed to make sigmoidoscopy an appropriate screening method. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01538550) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Adequate bowel preparation is necessary for optimal colonoscopy. Inadequate bowel preparation results in increased costs and imprecise colonoscopy results. This study aims to determine the incidence and risk factors of inadequate bowel preparation. Methods: In this study, 604 consecutive patients were observed prospectively who underwent colonoscopy examination. The patient's clinical and demographic data were obtained on the day of the procedure. Bowel preparation was evaluated by Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and was divided into two groups; adequate and inadequate. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: Inadequate bowel preparation incidence was 17.9%. In the univariate analysis, education level (P value = 0.009), body mass index (P value = 0.03), admission type (P value = 0.038), previous history of colonoscopy (P value = 0.03), color and consistency of the last feces (P value = 0.03), diabetes (P value = 0.004), and smoking (P value = 0.03) were significantly related with the incidence of inadequate bowel preparation. While ischemic heart disease (IHD) decreased the level of inadequate bowel preparation (P value = 0.047). Multivariate analysis showed that diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] = 2.18), smoking (OR = 2.10), inpatient status of admission type (OR = 3.32), last stool that was non‐watery (OR = 1.60), and ischemic heart disease (OR = 0.032) were independent factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation. Conclusion: Diabetic patients, smokers, inpatients and who defecated a non‐watery and colory stool as the last defecation are at risk of inadequate bowel preparation and need more potent regimens. It is important to inform patients about preventable factors that affect bowel preparation to improve their preparation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Shankhaprakshalana (SP) is a yogic method aiming to cleanse the bowel. It involves the use of warm saline water and a combination of five asanas. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness and safety of bowel preparation by SP. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study of prospectively collected data. Patients planned for colonoscopy were screened and enrolled to undergo bowel preparation by SP on the day of the colonoscopy. Patients having comorbid conditions, poor performance status, suspected or previously diagnosed intestinal stricture and past history of major abdominal surgery and those unable to perform asanas of SP were excluded. A low-fiber diet was advised for one day before the colonoscopy. Patients were advised to drink 400 mL of lukewarm saline water followed by five asanas (exercises) of SP, each done eight times dynamically and sequentially. After completing six such cycles, patients underwent colonoscopy. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score was used to assess the quality of bowel preparation. Results: Total 238 patients were included. The major indications for colonoscopy were abdominal pain (35.3%), hematochezia (23.9%), diarrhea (20.2%), constipation (10.9%) and anemia (9.7%). The mean age was 37.7 (± 12) years. The mean BBPS was 8 (± 1.2). Bowel preparation was inadequate (BBPS < 6) in only two patients. Mean segmental BBPS for the three segments of the colon (right, transverse and left) was 2.6 (± 0.5), 2.7 (± 0.4) and 2.6 (± 0.7), respectively. Minor adverse events (nausea, abdominal pain, vomiting, giddiness and bloating) were noted in 10 participants (4.2%), which did not require hospitalization. Bowel preparation was completed in 133 (± 35) minutes. Conclusion: Shankhaprakshalana is an effective and safe method to achieve adequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Since this is a single-center and retrospective study, future multi-centric, prospective studies comparing it with the standard bowel preparation regimens are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Providing patients with accurate and organized information about colonoscopy, while reducing anxiety, is critical to the procedure's success. This study evaluated the impact of an immersive 360° virtual reality (VR)-based educational intervention for first-time adult colonoscopy patients regarding anxiety, attitudes, knowledge, compliance with bowel preparation, and bowel cleanliness. A quasi-experimental design with a non-equivalent control group and non-synchronized pretest–post-test clinical trial was conducted with 40 patients in the experimental group and 40 in the control group. The 360° VR intervention included two sessions: precautions before colonoscopy and the colonoscopy process. The control group received education through individual verbal explanations with written materials. The findings indicated that the VR intervention significantly improved patients' colonoscopy-related anxiety, attitudes, adherence to bowel preparation instructions, and bowel cleanliness. Utilizing 360° VR as an educational tool has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of educational programs by providing realistic information and engaging patients. These findings suggest that 360° VR has the capacity to enhance screening rates and clinical outcomes by reducing negative perceptions associated with colonoscopy. Furthermore, the application of this method can extend to diverse diagnostic testing-related nursing situations in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colonoscopy is an essential method for diagnosing and treating colorectal cancer, relying on effective bowel preparation to thoroughly examine the large intestinal mucosa. Traditional education involves printed instructions and verbal explanations but does not guarantee clear patient understanding. Poor bowel preparation can obscure mucosal visibility, delaying cancer diagnosis and treatment. A mobile medical model using Android devices for bowel preparation education was tested in a single-blind, randomized trial. This trial enrolled outpatients undergoing colonoscopy at the Endoscopy Center for Diagnostic and Treatment between 27 October 2021 and 31 December 2022. This study introduced the ColonClean app alongside traditional methods. After examination, endoscopists rated the preparation quality using the Aronchick scale. A data analysis was conducted using SPSS 25.0 to determine if there was a significant improvement in bowel preparation quality between the control group (traditional method) and the experimental group (traditional method plus the ColonClean app). Forty patients were recruited in each group. In the experimental group, all ratings were "fair", with 75% receiving an "excellent" or "good" rating, showing statistical significance (p = 0.016). The ColonClean app improves bowel preparation quality more effectively than traditional care instructions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The quality of a colonoscopy is a key factor in clinical outcomes and largely depends on the bowel cleanliness achieved through proper preparation. The type of agent, adherence, and tolerability are factors that can influence the quality of bowel preparation and, consequently, the results of the procedure. This study aims to evaluate the factors that determine the choice of preparation agent and its impact on the quality of colonoscopy. Methodology: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted with a sample of 530 patients. Agents evaluated included polyethylene glycol (PEG), sodium picosulfate, and sodium-potassium-magnesium sulfate (Na-K-Mg sulfate), with their continuous and split-dose regimens, depending on the case. The reasons for selection and tolerability were assessed through a survey. Bowel cleanliness was determined by the endoscopist using the Boston scale. Results: The average age was 52.7 years (±13.4), with 60% being women. The most selected agent was PEG (81.9%) in the full-dose regimen (74.5%). The main determining factor was the availability of the drug, at 42.6%. Unwanted symptoms were reported in 62.6% of patients, however, 99.4% achieved adequate preparation (Boston =6). Conclusion: The primary factor related to the selection of the bowel preparation agent is availability. Objective tolerability does not significantly affect the quality of bowel cleanliness or the success of the procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is characterized by infrequent bowel movements and hard stools lasting for at least three months or longer. This disease affects 8–12% of the US population and 10–17% of the world population. Treatment and management involve identifying the primary cause, changing dietary habits, and adequate physical activity. Linaclotide is a guanylate cyclase-agonist acting locally in the luminal surface of the intestinal enterocyte leading to a signal transduction cascade, activation of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), thus increasing secretion of chloride and bicarbonate into the intestinal lumen with eventual increased intestinal fluid and faster transit time. Areas Covered: We reviewed multiple studies and did a thorough literature review on CIC including its pathophysiology. Through this literature review, we were able to discuss and give the context and rationale for drug regimens indicated for CIC. Expert Opinion: The era we live in right now is akin to nutrient-rich and fertilized soil as knowledge and resources are abundant. The opportunities and potential are endless. Constipation being more extensively studied, our understanding of medications and diseases broadens, leading to novel medications being discovered. Linaclotide is a pioneer in this aspect and can pave the way for future generations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Microbiota manipulation through preoperative probiotic supplementation to reduce surgical site infection has shown promising results in recent years. However, the changes in gut microbiota resulting from this manipulation remain unclear. In eastern Asia, Clostridium butyricum (CBM588) has been demonstrated to have antimicrobial ability. This study aimed to explore postoperative outcomes associated with microbiota changes in a murine colonic anastomosis model. Materials and Methods: C57BL/6 mice were divided into four groups. All mice, including group A as the control, received standard oral neomycin and metronidazole before surgery. Group B received CBM588 before surgery. Group C received the antibiotic cocktail therapy before surgery. Group D received the antibiotic cocktail therapy followed by CBM588 supplementation before surgery. A 16S rRNA amplicon with SMS was used to show the impact of different treatments on the murine gut microbiota. Results: The implementation of the antibiotic cocktail therapy resulted in improved postoperative performance, significantly better anastomotic healing scores, and reduced areas of anastomotic necrosis in both group C and D, but particularly prominently in group D. Metagenomic analysis revealed that group D was enriched with the order Clostridiales, the family Clostridiaceae, and the genus Clostridium, with low bacterial diversity and distinct bacterial composition. Conclusions: A preoperative antibiotic cocktail therapy followed by CBM588 supplementation modulates bacterial diversity and composition, resulting in an increased percentage of Clostridiaceae in a murine colonic anastomosis model. The associated outcomes include lower intra-abdominal adhesion scores, improved postoperative performance, improved anastomotic healing scores, and reduced areas of anastomotic necrosis.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer worldwide, being the fourth most prevalent cancer and the third most common in terms of mortality. A decrease in the incidence and mortality of CRC has been observed among adults over 50 years of age, screening colonoscopy being a contributory factor for this improvement. Adequate preparation of the colon is essential for obtaining accurate results and minimizing the risks associated with the colonoscopy procedure. Both ESGE (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) and UEG (United European Gastroenterology) recommend adequate preparation in at least 90% of cases, calculated both at the endoscopy center level and for each individual endoscopist. The purpose of our article is to review the literature on different bowel preparation products for colonoscopy and demonstrate the non inferiority of low-volume preparations over the standard PEG 4L. Preparations containing PEG are the most common in preparation for colonoscopy. A recent meta-analysis suggests that high-volume, mutiple-dose regimens are superior in terms of efficacy to low-volume, multiple- dose regimens, including low-volume PEG with various adjuvants and sodium phosphate, although with lower tolerability. Due to low levels of compliance, tolerability and acceptability, standard 4L single-dose regimens of PEG have been gradually and successfully replaced by newer regimens that include low-volume solutions. An example of low-volume split-dose preparation is the solution of low-volume PEG4000, sodium sulphate, citric acid, sodium citrate, sodium chloride, potassium chloride and simethicone. In several studies this 2 L low volume preparations exhibit similar effectiveness with safety profiles that are comparable to classic 4 L PEG, with lower incidence of adverse effects and good tolerability. In conclusion, adequate preparation increases the quality of colonoscopy procedures as proper patient preparation is essential to obtain an optimal visualization of the intestinal mucosa. Low-volume bowel preparation is effective, safe and well tolerated by the patients, with higher acceptability compared to the standard volume PEG.

Objective To evaluate safety and efficacy of linaclotide combined with polyethylene glycol(PEG) for bowel preparation. Methods A total of 612 patients from Department of Gastroenterology at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University for colonoscopy examination from January to June 2023 were selected. They were divided into group 1(1 L PEG+2 L PEG), group 2(linaclotide+2 L PEG) and group 3(1 L PEG+linaclotide+1 L PEG) by random number table method, with 204 cases in each group. The Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale(OBPS), the insertion time of colonoscopy, the time of the first defecation, the frequency of defecations, the occurrence of adverse effects and patients' tolerability were compared among the three groups. Results A total of 601 patients completed bowel preparation and accepted colonoscopy. Group 1 exhibited no statistically significant differences to group 2 with regards to OBPS and insertion time. However, Group 2 demonstrated a shorter duration for the time of the first defecation in comparison to both group 1 and group 3(P＜0.05). Group 1 displayed a higher frequency of defecations as compared to Group 2 and Group 3(P＜0.05) . The incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in group 2 and group 3 than in group 1(P＜0.05). The overall tolerance score of patients in group 1 was lower than that in group 2 and group 3(P＜0.05). Conclusions The effect of combining 2 L PEG with 290 μg of linaclotide for bowel preparation before colonoscopy is similar to that of 3 L PEG. It can reduce the incidence of adverse reactions and patients exhibit good tolerance. For patients who are intolerant to a single high-dose administration of PEG, they need divided-dose regimen of 2 L PEG in combination with linaclotide.

Background: Older patients with constipation are at higher risk for inadequate bowel preparation, but there are currently no targeted strategies. This study aims to develop an abdominal vibration combined with walking exercise (AVCWE) program and assess its feasibility among older patients with constipation. Methods: Phase I: Using the Delphi technique, eight experts across three professional fields were consulted to develop the AVCWE program. The experts evaluated and provided recommendations on demonstration videos and detailed descriptions of the preliminary protocol. Phase II: A single-arm feasibility study of the AVCWE program was conducted on 30 older patients with constipation undergoing colonoscopy at a tertiary hospital in China. A 10-point exercise program evaluation form and several open-ended questions were used to gather feedback from participants regarding the program. In both phases, content analysis was used to critically analyze and summarize qualitative suggestions for protocol modifications. Results: Based on feedback from the expert panel, the AVCWE program developed in Phase I included two procedures during laxative ingestion: at least 5,500 steps of walking exercise and two cycles of moderate-intensity abdominal vibration (each cycle consisted of 10 min of vibration and 10 min of rest). The feasibility study in Phase II showed high positive patient feedback scores for the program, ranging from 9.07 ± 0.74 to 9.73 ± 0.52. Conclusion: The AVCWE program was developed by eight multidisciplinary experts and was well accepted by 30 older patients with constipation. Study participants believed that this program was simple, safe, appropriate, and helpful for their bowel preparation. The findings of this study may provide valuable information for optimizing bowel preparation in older patients with constipation.

Adequate bowel preparation is a prerequisite for colonoscopy， and chronic constipation （CC） is one of the important influencing factors. In recent years， scholars have paid more and more attention to bowel preparation for CC. In this article， the selection of intestinal detergents before colonoscopy for CC was summarized according to literature review. The effectiveness and safety of each protocol were assessed to provide reference for clinical practice， improve the quality of bowel preparation for CC and deliver timely tertiary prevention for colorectal cancer.

Lanlang Zhang,1 Lixia Huang,2 Shanshan Liu,3 Xiaofeng Sun4 1Department of Haemodialysis, Fuyong People’s Hospital of Baoan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, 518103, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Gastrology, Fuyong People’s Hospital of Baoan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, 518103, People’s Republic of China; 3Nursing Department, Fuyong People’s Hospital of Baoan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, 518103, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Ultrasound, Shenzhen Baoan Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, 518000, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Xiaofeng Sun, Department of Ultrasound, Shenzhen Baoan Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, 518000, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86-13723457417, Email 350787457@qq.comAbstract: This study aimed to optimize bowel preparation efficacy for colonoscopy in elderly constipation patients. A 71-year-old patient with chronic constipation and a history of poor bowel preparation. To address these challenges, we implemented a personalized strategy combining of PEG administration and walking exercise. The PEG was administered according to a protocol, with intermittent exercise breaks of 10 minute. Bowel cleanliness was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Adverse reactions and tolerance were closely monitored throughout the intervention. The patient’s BBPS score improved from 3 to 8 post-intervention. The exercise intervention was well-tolerated (rating I), and mild nausea was observed only after the first PEG dose. No severe adverse reactions occurred. Subsequent Follow-up revealed symptom relief. The personalized approach combining (PEG and exercise intervention) successfully improved bowel preparation quality in the elderly constipation patient undergoing colonoscopy. This approach considers age-related changes in gastrointestinal function and activity level, offering an effective strategy to improve patient tolerance and reduce adverse reactions during bowel preparation. The findings underscore the importance of tailoring interventions for elderly constipation patients to optimize the colonoscopy experience.Keywords: compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder, exercise intervention plan, bowel preparation, colonoscopy, elderly, constipation

Objectives Methods Results Conclusion Colonoscopy (CS) is an important screening method for the early detection and removal of precancerous lesions. The stool state during bowel preparation (BP) should be properly evaluated to perform CS with sufficient quality. This study aimed to develop a smartphone application (app) with an artificial intelligence (AI) model for stool state evaluation during BP and to investigate whether the use of the app could maintain an adequate quality of CS.First, stool images were collected in our hospital to develop the AI model and were categorized into grade 1 (solid or muddy stools), grade 2 (cloudy watery stools), and grade 3 (clear watery stools). The AI model for stool state evaluation (grades 1–3) was constructed and internally verified using the cross‐validation method. Second, a prospective study was conducted on the quality of CS using the app in our hospital. The primary end‐point was the proportion of patients who achieved Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) ≥6 among those who successfully used the app.The AI model showed mean accuracy rates of 90.2%, 65.0%, and 89.3 for grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The prospective study enrolled 106 patients and revealed that 99.0% (95% confidence interval 95.3–99.9%) of patients achieved a BBPS ≥6.The proportion of patients with BBPS ≥6 during CS using the developed app exceeded the set expected value. This app could contribute to the performance of high‐quality CS in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: There is significant practice variation with respect to the use of bowel preparation to reduce surgical site infection (SSI) following colon surgery. Although intravenous antibiotics + mechanical bowel preparation + oral antibiotics (IVA + MBP + OA) has been shown to be superior to IVA + MBP and IVA, there are insufficient high‐quality data from randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that directly compare these options. This is an important question, because if IVA + OA has similar effectiveness to IVA + MBP + OA, mechanical bowel preparation can be safely omitted, and the associated side effects avoided. The aim of this work is to compare rates of SSI following IVA + OA + MBP (MBP) versus IVA + OA (OA) for elective colon surgery. Method: This is a multicentre, parallel, two‐arm, noninferiority RCT comparing IVA + OA + MBP versus IVA + OA. The primary outcome is the overall rate of SSI 30 days following surgery. Secondary outcomes are length of stay and 30‐day emergency room visit and readmission rates. The planned sample size is 1062 subjects with four participating high‐volume centres. Overall SSI rates 30 days following surgery between the treatment groups will be compared using a general linear model. Secondary outcomes will be analysed with linear regression for continuous outcomes, logistic regression for binary outcomes and modified Poisson regression for count data. Conclusion: It is expected that IVA + OA will work similarly to IVA + MBP + OA and that this work will provide definitive evidence showing that MBP is not necessary to reduce SSI. This is highly relevant to both patients and physicians as it will have the potential to significantly change practice and outcomes following colon surgery in Canada and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This meta‐analysis aimed to comprehensively explore the risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation (IBP). Methods: We searched the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases up to August 24, 2023, to identify observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined risk factors for IBP. A random effects model was used to pool the adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: A total of 125 studies (91 observational studies, 34 RCTs) were included. Meta‐analyses of observational studies revealed that three preparation‐related factors, namely, characteristics of last stool (solid or brown liquid), incomplete preparation intake, and incorrect diet restriction, were strong predictors of IBP. The other factors were moderately correlated with IBP incidence, including demographic variables (age, body mass index, male sex, Medicaid insurance, and current smoking), comorbidities (diabetes, liver cirrhosis, psychiatric disease, Parkinson's disease, previous IBP, poor mobility, inpatient, and Bristol stool form 1/2), medications (tricyclic antidepressants, opioids, antidepressants, narcotics, antipsychotics, and calcium channel blockers), and preparation‐related factors (preparation‐to‐colonoscopy interval not within 3 to 5/6 h, nonsplit preparation, and preparation instructions not followed). No colonoscopy indications were found to be related to IBP. Meta‐analyses of RCTs showed that education, constipation, stroke/dementia, and discomfort during preparation were also moderately associated with IBP. Most of the other findings were consistent with the pooled results of observational studies. However, primarily due to imprecision and inconsistency, the certainty of evidence for most factors was very low to moderate. Conclusions: We summarized five categories of risk factors for IBP. Compared to demographic variables, comorbidities, medications, and colonoscopy indications, preparation‐related elements were more strongly associated with IBP. These findings may help clinicians identify high‐risk individuals and provide guidance for IBP prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Inadequate bowel preparation can result in decreased diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic safety of colonoscopy for colon cancer screening. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) has been used to assess the quality of bowel preparation. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) are commonly used medications for diabetes mellitus and obesity that are known to delay gastrointestinal motility. We hypothesized that the use of GLP-1RA would be associated with decreased quality of bowel preparation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent screening or surveillance colonoscopy at a large academic medical center between December 2021 and December 2022. We included patients taking any GLP-1RA for diabetes or obesity during colonoscopy defined as our cases, and patients who were prescribed GLP-1RA at one point but not within 3 months of colonoscopy defined as our controls. We excluded patients on any promotility or antimotility agents and those without BBPS recorded on their procedure report. Independent t test assessed statistical differences in the case and control groups to compare the quality of bowel preparation for continuous variables, and the χ² test was used for categorical variables. Multivariate linear regression including diabetes as a covariate was also performed for continuous variables, and multivariate logistic regression was performed for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients were included in the study, comprising 265 (59%) cases and 181 controls (41%). There were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline except for the diagnosis of diabetes (P = 0.001) with a higher proportion of patients with diabetes in the cases. The mean BBPS was significantly higher in controls (7.0 ± 1.9 vs 7.5 ± 2.4, P = 0.046) when controlling for diabetes. The percentage of patients with a total BBPS score of <5 was significantly higher in cases (15.5% vs 6.6%, P = 0.01). The proportion of patients who required a repeat colonoscopy due to poor bowel preparation was also significantly higher in cases (18.9% vs 11.1%, P = 0.041). DISCUSSION: The use of GLP-1RA was associated with a statistically significantly lower quality of bowel preparation, with additional clinical significance given a notable difference in the need for a repeat colonoscopy. It will be essential to understand the cumulative effect of medications that may delay gastric emptying on the quality of bowel preparation to better understand the appropriate measures and counseling that need to be taken before undergoing outpatient colonoscopies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transvaginal ultrasound is effective in diagnosing endometriosis involving the rectosigmoid bowel. Some authors suggest enhanced detection of rectosigmoid involvement with bowel preparation. Conversely, conflicting views argue that bowel preparation may not improve diagnostic precision, yielding similar results to rectal water contrast. No existing meta -analysis compares these approaches. Our study aims to conduct a meta -analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of transvaginal ultrasound with bowel preparation, with and without rectal water contrast. Studies published between 2000 and 2023 were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science. From 561 citations, we selected nine studies to include in this meta -analysis. The study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). The mean prevalence of endometriosis rectosigmoid was 43.6% (range 17,56–76,66%) in the group with bowel preparation and 64,80% (50,0–83,60%) for the group with bowel preparation and rectal water contrast. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% and 94% for bowel preparation and 92% and 95% and for bowel preparation with water contrast. We conclude that, there was no significant difference between performing transvaginal ultrasound with intestinal preparation with and without water contrast. In clinical practice, the absence of a significant difference between these methods should be taken into account when making recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: Colonoscopy has a vital role in the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), as well as in the estimation of disease severity, monitoring response to therapy, and surveillance for neoplasia. We performed a systematic review of randomised trials of various bowel preparations for colonoscopy in IBD. Methods: We searched various electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL) for studies reporting about the use of various strategies to improve colonoscopy preparation in IBD. We included only randomized clinical trials (RCTs). A network meta-analysis was done using a frequentist approach to compare the effectiveness of various bowel preparations. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0. Other outcome parameters like compliance, tolerance, acceptance, and adverse effects were assessed qualitatively. Results: Seven RCTs reporting about 960 patients were included. On comparison with 4 liter (L) of poliethylen glycol (PEG), oral sulfate solution (OR=1.1, 95%CI: 0.65-1.86); PEG2L/Ascorbate (OR=0.98, 95%CI: 0.65- 1.48); PEG1L (OR=1, 95%CI: 0.55-1.81); PEG2L plus bisacodyl (OR=1.08, 95%CI: 0.71-1.65); PEG4L plus simethicone (OR=1, 95%CI: 0.67-1.50); PEG/ sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (SPMC) 1.5L (OR=0.99, 95%CI: 0.55-1.78); SPMC 2L (OR=1.09, 95%CI: 0.61-1.97) had similar effectiveness. Three RCTs reported compliance, five RCTs reported tolerance, two studies reported patient acceptance and five RCTs reported data on the willingness of patients to repeat the procedure in the future. Low-volume preparations had better compliance, tolerance, acceptance, and willingness to repeat. No difference in additional outcomes like change in disease activity after colonoscopy, procedure-related outcomes after colonoscopy like cecal intubation rate, and change in electrolyte levels were found. Conclusion: Various bowel preparations had similar effectiveness in respect to colonoscopy preparation in IBD patients. Low-volume preparations have better compliance, tolerance, and acceptance. The systematic review was limited by a small number of included RCTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research was carried out to determine the impact of informing patients who would undergo a colonoscopy via short messaging service (SMS) on the procedure quality and satisfaction. The study was designed as a randomized controlled experimental and single-blind. The study was completed with 170 patients (87 in the control group and 83 in the intervention group). Verbal and written information about bowel preparation was provided to all patients at the first appointment. Additionally, a total of nine informative SMS, including the time of colonoscopy, dietary restrictions to be followed, purgative drugs to be used, and the time of taking the drugs, were sent to the patients in the intervention group starting 2 days before the procedure. Data were collected using a patient questionnaire, Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), and postcolonoscopy follow-up form. The mean score of each colon segment and the total BBPS mean score of the patients in the intervention group were higher compared to the control group, and the difference between them was statistically significant. The percentage of patients with adequate bowel preparation was significantly higher in the intervention group (84.3%) in comparison with the control group (71.3%). The intervention group had high compliance with a clear diet, enema application, and oral medication intake (P <.05). The cecum was reached in 85.5% of the intervention group. The majority of the patients (89.2%) in the intervention group reported that the information provided via SMS was adequate, and 91.6% were satisfied with the information provided by SMS. The study shows that, in addition to written and verbal information provided before colonoscopy, SMS information positively impacts the quality of patients' bowel preparation, increases their compliance with the preparation instructions, the rate of reaching the cecum, and their satisfaction. Patient education with this practice can help ensure adequate bowel preparation quality and increase patient comfort in the colonoscopy procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Although studies have shown that the quality of bowel preparation with low‐residue diet (LRD) is as effective as that of clear fluid diet (CLD), there is currently no consensus on how long an LRD should last. The aim of this study was to compare a 1‐day versus 3‐day LRD on bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Methods: A systematic review search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane database from inception to April 2023. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared 1‐day with 3‐day LRD bowel cleansing regiments for patients undergoing colonoscopy. The rate of adequate bowel preparation, polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, tolerability, willingness to repeat preparation, and adverse events were estimated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We also performed meta‐analysis to identify risk factors and predictors of inadequate preparation. Results: Four studies published between 2019 and 2023 with 1927 participants were included. The present meta‐analysis suggested that 1‐day LRD was comparable with 3‐day LRD for adequate bowel preparation (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.65–1.21; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%; P = 0.52). The polyp detection rate (OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77–1.14; P = 0.52; I2 = 23%; P = 0.27) and adenoma detection rate (OR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71–1.08; P = 0.21; I2 = 0%; P = 0.52) were similar between the groups. There were significantly higher odds of tolerability in patients consuming 1‐day LRD compared with 3‐day LRD (OR 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13–2.39; P < 0.01; I2 = 47%; P = 0.15). In addition, constipation was identified as the independent predictor of inadequate preparation (OR 1.98; 95% CI, 1.27–3.11; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%; P = 0.46). Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that a 1‐day LRD was as effective as a 3‐day CLD in the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy and significantly improved tolerability of patients. In addition, constipation is an independent risk factor of poor bowel preparation, and the duration of LRD in patients with constipation still needs further clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer worldwide, being the fourth most prevalent cancer and the third most common in terms of mortality. A decrease in the incidence and mortality of CRC has been observed among adults over 50 years of age, screening colonoscopy being a contributory factor for this improvement. Adequate preparation of the colon is essential for obtaining accurate results and minimizing the risks associated with the colonoscopy procedure. Both ESGE (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) and UEG (United European Gastroenterology) recommend adequate preparation in at least 90% of cases, calculated both at the endoscopy center level and for each individual endoscopist. The purpose of our article is to review the literature on different bowel preparation products for colonoscopy and demonstrate the non-inferiority of low-volume preparations over the standard PEG 4L. Preparations containing PEG are the most common in preparation for colonoscopy. A recent meta-analysis suggests that high-volume, mutiple-dose regimens are superior in terms of efficacy to low-volume, multipledose regimens, including low-volume PEG with various adjuvants and sodium phosphate, although with lower tolerability. Due to low levels of compliance, tolerability and acceptability, standard 4L single-dose regimens of PEG have been gradually and successfully replaced by newer regimens that include low-volume solutions. An example of low-volume split-dose preparation is the solution of low-volume PEG4000, sodium sulphate, citric acid, sodium citrate, sodium chloride, potassium chloride and simethicone. In several studies this 2 L low volume preparations exhibit similar effectiveness with safety profiles that are comparable to classic 4 L PEG, with lower incidence of adverse effects and good tolerability. In conclusion, adequate preparation increases the quality of colonoscopy procedures as proper patient preparation is essential to obtain an optimal visualization of the intestinal mucosa. Low-volume bowel preparation is effective, safe and well tolerated by the patients, with higher acceptability compared to the standard volume PEG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the frequency and risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation using Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Gastroenterology Department, Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan. Period: September 2022 to June 2023. Methods: The study comprised of patients between 18 to 70 years undergoing colonoscopy. Boston bowel preparation score (BBPS) was used to evaluate the quality of bowel preparation before washing or suctioning. Total score was calculated taking sum of scores in all three segments. Adequate preparation was defined as all 3 BBPS segment scores = 2. Results: In a total of 136 patients, the mean age was 55.8±14.1 years. The mean BBPS score was 5.7±3.5. Based on the criteria of overall adequate rate, inadequate preparation was seen among 44 (32.4%) patients. Lower risk of inadequate preparation was significantly associated with outpatient patients, patients consuming more water and patients with liquid stool consistency whereas odds were significantly higher among patients with age 50 years and above, males, diabetic patients, patients receiving movcal sachet and dulcolex for preparation, patients with lower number of stools (2-4 stools per day) and, patients receiving insulin. Conclusion: The risk of inadequate preparation was higher among older age patients, male gender, diabetic patients, and patients with less number of stools with semi solid consistency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The role of bowel preparation before colectomy in Crohn's disease patients remains controversial. This retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes associated with mechanical and antibiotic colon preparation in patients diagnosed with Crohn's disease undergoing elective colectomy. Method: Data were collected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participant user files from 2016 to 2021. A total of 6244 patients with Crohn's disease who underwent elective colectomy were included. The patients were categorized into two groups: those who received combined colon preparation (mechanical and antibiotic) and those who did not receive any form of bowel preparation. The primary outcomes assessed were the rate of anastomotic leak and the occurrence of deep organ infection. Secondary outcomes included all‐cause short‐term mortality, clinical‐related morbidity, ostomy creation, unplanned reoperation, operative time, hospital length of stay and ileus. Results: Combined colon preparation was associated with significantly reduced risks of anastomotic leak (relative risk 0.73, 95% CI 0.56–0.95, P = 0.021) and deep organ infection (relative risk 0.68, 95% CI 0.56–0.83, P < 0.001). Additionally, patients who underwent colon preparation had lower rates of ostomy creation, shorter hospital stays and a decreased incidence of ileus. However, there was no significant difference in all‐cause short‐term mortality or the need for unplanned reoperation between the two groups. Conclusion: This study shows that mechanical and antibiotic colon preparation may have clinical benefits for patients with Crohn's disease undergoing elective colectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate safety and efficacy of linaclotide combined with polyethylene glycol(PEG) for bowel preparation. Methods A total of 612 patients from Department of Gastroenterology at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University for colonoscopy examination from January to June 2023 were selected. They were divided into group 1(1 L PEG+2 L PEG), group 2(linaclotide+2 L PEG) and group 3(1 L PEG+linaclotide+1 L PEG) by random number table method, with 204 cases in each group. The Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale(OBPS), the insertion time of colonoscopy, the time of the first defecation, the frequency of defecations, the occurrence of adverse effects and patients' tolerability were compared among the three groups. Results A total of 601 patients completed bowel preparation and accepted colonoscopy. Group 1 exhibited no statistically significant differences to group 2 with regards to OBPS and insertion time. However, Group 2 demonstrated a shorter duration for the time of the first defecation in comparison to both group 1 and group 3(P＜0.05). Group 1 displayed a higher frequency of defecations as compared to Group 2 and Group 3(P＜0.05) . The incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in group 2 and group 3 than in group 1(P＜0.05). The overall tolerance score of patients in group 1 was lower than that in group 2 and group 3(P＜0.05). Conclusions The effect of combining 2 L PEG with 290 μg of linaclotide for bowel preparation before colonoscopy is similar to that of 3 L PEG. It can reduce the incidence of adverse reactions and patients exhibit good tolerance. For patients who are intolerant to a single high-dose administration of PEG, they need divided-dose regimen of 2 L PEG in combination with linaclotide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Adequate bowel preparation is essential for diagnostic, screening, surveillance, and therapeutic colonoscopy. 3D virtual reality (3D-VR) has the characteristics of depth, interactivity and visuality and is widely used in medicine, so it can be used for patient education and training. The aim of our study is to determine the impact of using 3D virtual reality video for patients education on bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Materials and methods. A prospective, blind, randomized clinical trial was launched at the Republican Vilnius University Hospital (RVUL) on 07.03.2021, which included 50 outpatients who had indications for colonoscopy until 28.02.2022. Patients were randomly assigned to control and experimental groups. The first group was given the bowel preparation information in the standard form used by RVUL – in writing, and the second – in a 3D virtual reality video. The content of the information provided to both groups was the same. The quality of bowel preparation was assessed based on the Boston and Ottawa bowel preparation scales. Results. Of the 50 outpatients who participated in the study, 26 were assigned to the control group, 24 to the study group. The patients of both groups were identical in terms of sex, age, body mass index, comorbidities. The mean (SD) BBPS score was statistically significantly lower in the control group compared to the 3D-VR video group (5.96(±1) vs. 7.58(±1.47); p < 0.001). The mean (SD) scores of OBPS were higher in the control group (6.58(±2.44) than in the study group 1.83(±2.32); p < 0.001). The rate of adequate bowel preparation in the 3DVR video group was higher than in the control group (18(69.23%) vs. 23(95.83%); the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.024)). The rate of terminal ileum intubation in the control group was 50% compared to 83.33% in the 3D-VR video group (p = 0.02).The mean (SD) colonoscopy time was statistically significantly shorter in the 3D-VR video group 23.04(±3.66) minutes and 16.5(±4.28) minutes, p = <0.001. Conclusions. Patients who were informed by 3D-VR method before colonoscopy had statistically significantly better bowel preparation, as well as reduced procedure time and possibly increased detection rates of polyps and adenomas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adequate bowel preparation is a prerequisite for colonoscopy, and chronic constipation (CC) is one of the important influencing factors. In recent years, scholars have paid more and more attention to bowel preparation for CC. In this article, the selection of intestinal detergents before colonoscopy for CC was summarized according to literature review. The effectiveness and safety of each protocol were assessed to provide reference for clinical practice, improve the quality of bowel preparation for CC and deliver timely tertiary prevention for colorectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Bowel preparation is considered as major obstacle before colonoscopy, and it is often reported as the most feared part of the procedure. The aim of this study is to determine the difference in efficacy between a split dose of PEG and the previous day regimen in cleaning the colon, using Boston bowel preparation scale. In addition, also to evaluate patient satisfaction regarding the modality of preparation. Methods: The study included 200 hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy at Beirut hospitals between 2021 and 2023. One of the two regimens will be prescribed randomly to the patients before colonoscopy: 98 (49%) in Group A (patients treated with PEG preparation as a split dose for 2 days), and 102 (51%) in Group B (patients taking PEG preparation as a whole dose). Data was analyzed using SPSS version 25. Results: Patients were distributed between 105 (52.5%) males and 95 (47.5%) females. The top two indications for colonoscopy were bleeding (34%), change in bowel habits (constipation/diarrhea) (32%). Patients experienced adverse events noting cramps (48.5%), stomach ache (32%), headache (31%), vomiting (53%), nausea (53%), sleep disturbance (27%), bloating (26.5%), and malaise (26%). A statistically significant difference (p = 0.040) was detected in sleep disturbance: 20.4% of patients in group A and 33.3% of patients in group B. The average satisfaction score was 3.02 ± 1.03 over 4 (Group A) and 3.04 ± 0.99 over 4 (Group B) (p = 0.896). The average BBPS was 8.07 ± 1.14 (Group A) and 8.28 ± 1.0 (Group B) (p = 0.162). Conclusion: The two administrations were almost similar in term of satisfaction and BBPS. As multiple factors like age, sexe, comorbidities may contribute in altering how much a given drug is safe and efficace, more research is needed to choose the best 3regimen for each patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The unpleasant taste of polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been a hindrance to patients undergoing colonoscopy. Aim: This study aims to determine whether the addition of a vitamin drink (Mizone) to the 4L split-dose PEG regimen would be effective in improving the solution's palatability, and reducing patient discomfort during bowel preparation. Methods: The present prospective, single endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled study randomly assigned patients into two groups: PEG + Mizone group (3.6 L of PEG solution plus 0.4 L of Mizone) and PEG group (4 L of PEG solution). Palatability was assessed using a Likert scale of 1–5. The adverse events, amount of unconsumed solution, and willingness to repeat the same process were recorded through a questionnaire. The present study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000034484). Results: A total of 132 patients were included. The demographic characteristics of these patients were comparable between the two groups. The palatability score (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) was higher in the PEG + Mizone group, when compared to the control group (4.00 ± 0.859 vs. 2.95 ± 0.999, p

Abstract Background and Aim Adequate bowel preparation is necessary for optimal colonoscopy. Inadequate bowel preparation results in increased costs and imprecise colonoscopy results. This study aims to determine the incidence and risk factors of inadequate bowel preparation. Methods In this study, 604 consecutive patients were observed prospectively who underwent colonoscopy examination. The patient's clinical and demographic data were obtained on the day of the procedure. Bowel preparation was evaluated by Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and was divided into two groups; adequate and inadequate. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results Inadequate bowel preparation incidence was 17.9%. In the univariate analysis, education level (P value = 0.009), body mass index (P value = 0.03), admission type (P value = 0.038), previous history of colonoscopy (P value = 0.03), color and consistency of the last feces (P value = 0.03), diabetes (P value = 0.004), and smoking (P value = 0.03) were significantly related with the incidence of inadequate bowel preparation. While ischemic heart disease (IHD) decreased the level of inadequate bowel preparation (P value = 0.047). Multivariate analysis showed that diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] = 2.18), smoking (OR = 2.10), inpatient status of admission type (OR = 3.32), last stool that was non‐watery (OR = 1.60), and ischemic heart disease (OR = 0.032) were independent factors associated with inadequate bowel preparation. Conclusion Diabetic patients, smokers, inpatients and who defecated a non‐watery and colory stool as the last defecation are at risk of inadequate bowel preparation and need more potent regimens. It is important to inform patients about preventable factors that affect bowel preparation to improve their preparation outcomes.

Background: During esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed with colonoscopy, gastric and duodenal erythema, erosions, and ulcerations are often observed. This investigation was designed to review the prevalence of gastroduodenal lesions in patients who have undergone wireless capsule endoscopy using standard bowel cleansing preparations, but no endoscopy or sedation. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients referred for capsule endoscopy. Records and capsule reports were reviewed for the patient demographics, preparation prescribed, procedural indications, and gastroduodenal findings. The preparations studied included polyethylene glycol lavage (PEG), PEG plus bisacodyl (PEG + bis), bisacodyl (bis), oral sulfate solution (OSS), and no prep. Results: Among the 1236 records, 498 (40.3%) were men and 738 (59.7%) were women. The mean age was 56 years +/− 18 years SD. The percentage of patients with lesions after any bowel preparation was 52.7% for gastric lesions and 23.6% for duodenal lesions. The percentage of patients with gastroduodenal lesions was 58.3% with prep, compared to 38.2% without prep. These findings were statistically significant, with an RR of 1.53 [1.19–1.94] (p-value = 0.00004). This difference was more pronounced in the OSS group RR of 1.65 [1.29–2.1] and bisacodyl group RR of 1.64 [1.25–2.15] compared to the PEG group RR of 0.95 [0.7–1.3]. Conclusions: This study showed that patients undergoing wireless capsule endoscopy who received bowel preparations had a significant increase in gastric and duodenal lesions. Of the preparations studied, OSS was associated with a greater number of gastroduodenal lesions, while PEG was the least associated with lesions, with an occurrence similar to the non-prep group. The clinical significance of these lesions remains undetermined. Endoscopists should be aware that preparations are associated with gastroduodenal lesions to avoid the misinterpretation and misdiagnosis of these lesions.