Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24995014›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2014

Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Lavage Solution versus Colonic Hydrotherapy for Bowel Preparation before Colonoscopy: A Single Center, Randomized, and Controlled Study.

Yan Cao, Kai-Yuan Zhang, Jiao Li, Hao Lu, Wan-Ling Xie, Sheng-Tao Liao, Dong-Feng Chen, Deng-Feng Zeng, Chun-Hui Lan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 89% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The advantage of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution combined with lactulose in patients with long interval preparation-to-colonoscopy.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2020
    Trial
  2. Characterization of the gut microbiota in frail elderly patients.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yan CaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Kai-Yuan ZhangCadet Brigade, The Third Military Medical University, 30 Gaotanyan Street, Chongqing 400038, China.
Jiao LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Hao LuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Wan-Ling XieDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Sheng-Tao LiaoCadet Brigade, The Third Military Medical University, 30 Gaotanyan Street, Chongqing 400038, China.
Dong-Feng ChenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Deng-Feng ZengNursing Department, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Chun-Hui LanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Daping Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, 10 Changjiang Branch Road, Chongqing 400042, China.
Army Medical University · CNDaping Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This single center, randomized, and controlled study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage (PEG-EL) solution and colonic hydrotherapy (CHT) for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. A total of 196 eligible outpatients scheduled for diagnostic colonoscopy were randomly assigned to the PEG-EL (n = 102) or CHT (n = 94) groups. Primary outcome measures included colonic cleanliness and adverse effects. Secondary outcome measures were patient satisfaction and preference, colonoscopic findings, ileocecal arrival rate, examiner satisfaction, and cecal intubation time. The results show that PEG-EL group was associated with significantly better colonic cleanliness than CHT group, fewer adverse effects, and increased examiner satisfaction. However, the CHT group had higher patient satisfaction and higher diverticulosis detection rates. Moreover, the results showed the same ileocecal arrival rate and patient preference between the two groups (P > 0.05). These findings indicate that PEG-EL is the preferred option in patients who followed the preparation instructions completely.

Identifiers

PMID24995014
PMCPMC4068103
OpenAlexW2048735296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.