98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Sodium picosulfate (SP)/magnesium citrate (MC) and polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid are recommended by Western guidelines as laxative solutions for bowel preparation. Clinically, SP/MC has a slower post-dose defaecation response than PEG and is perceived as less cleansing; therefore, it is not currently used for major bowel cancer screening preparation. The standard formulation for bowel preparation is PEG; however, a large dose is required, and it has a distinctive flavour that is considered unpleasant. SP/MC requires a small dose and ensures fluid intake because it is administered in another beverage. Therefore, clinical trials have shown that SP/MC is superior to PEG in terms of acceptability. We aim to compare the novel bowel cleansing method (test group) comprising SP/MC with elobixibat hydrate and the standard bowel cleansing method comprising PEG plus ascorbic acid (standard group) for patients preparing for outpatient colonoscopy.
Methods: This phase III, multicentre, single-blind, noninferiority, randomised, controlled, trial has not yet been completed. Patients aged 40-69 years will be included as participants. Patients with a history of abdominal or pelvic surgery, constipation, inflammatory bowel disease, or severe organ dysfunction will be excluded. The target number of research participants is 540 (standard group, 270 cases; test group, 270 cases). The primary endpoint is the degree of bowel cleansing (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] score ≥ 6). The secondary endpoints are patient acceptability, adverse events, polyp/adenoma detection rate, number of polyps/adenomas detected, degree of bowel cleansing according to the BBPS (BBPS score ≥ 8), degree of bowel cleansing according to the Aronchik scale, and bowel cleansing time.
Discussion: This trial aims to develop a "patient-first" colon cleansing regimen without the risk of inadequate bowel preparation by using both elobixibat hydrate and SP/MC.
Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT; no. s041210067; 9 September 2021; https://jrct.niph.go.jp/ ), protocol version 1.5 (May 1, 2023).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10837887 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-024-03146-6 | DOI Listing |
Endoscopy
September 2025
Dept. of Gastroenterology and Hepatology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Background: Bowel preparation is essential for colonoscopy but may deter patients. Although low-volume laxatives are better tolerated, their impact on patient-reported outcomes remains unclear. We compared low- and intermediate volume bowel preparation and assessed the impact on tolerability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJGH Open
September 2025
The Fourth School of Clinical Medicine Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou First People's Hospital Hangzhou, Zhejiang China.
Objective: To compare the efficacy of polyethylene glycol electrolyte (PEG) combined with lactulose versus PEG alone in bowel preparation quality for colonoscopy.
Methods: The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251035139). Comprehensive literature searches were conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, and VIP.
Therap Adv Gastroenterol
August 2025
Gastroenterology Department, University Hospital Estaing, 1 Place Aubrac, Clermont-Ferrand 63100, France.
Background: While several small sample size randomized controlled trials suggested the superiority of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) over placebo in ulcerative colitis (UC), the most effective modality to perform FMT remains unknown.
Objectives: To compare the efficacy of different modalities of FMT to induce clinical remission in patients with UC.
Data Sources And Methods: We performed a systematic review and network analysis (sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL; random effects model) of randomized controlled trials including at least one arm of FMT in adult patients with active UC.
Surg Endosc
August 2025
Department of Surgical Nursing, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa, Istanbul, Turkey.
Background: Effective bowel preparation is essential for successful colonoscopy, allowing for optimal mucosal visualization and polyp detection. While standard educational materials are commonly used, mobile health technologies offer potential for improving patient adherence and preparation quality.
Methods: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of mobile application-based bowel preparation training on bowel preparation compliance, quality, and anxiety levels in patients scheduled for colonoscopy.
Vet Rec
August 2025
Postgraduate Program in Veterinary Medicine (Clinical and Animal Reproduction), Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Background: Challenges associated with bowel cleansing protocols for canine colonoscopy include practical applicability and inadequate preparations. This study aimed to describe and evaluate an adapted protocol to simplify colonoscopy preparation in dogs.
Methods: A low-residue diet and a reduced volume of sodium picosulphate and magnesium citrate laxative were used orally alongside a saline enema.