Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25684963›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Split-dose menthol-enhanced PEG vs PEG-ascorbic acid for colonoscopy preparation.

Ala I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01788709 (PEG-Electrolyte Solution), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

NCT01788709 phase4completednot on this map

PEG-Electrolyte Solution (FORTRANS®) With Mentholyptus Drops (Halls®) Versus Reduced Volume Ascorbic Acid Supplemented PEG-Electrolyte (MoviPrep®) in Colonoscopy Preparation: A Randomised Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmerican University of Beirut Medical CenterRan2013 to 2014Enrolled200ConditionsBowel Cleansing in Preparation for ColonoscopyArmspreparation cleaning solution
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Sensory characterization of bowel cleansing solutions.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2016
    Article
  3. Optimizing Colonoscopy Quality: From Bowel Preparation to Surveillance.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2016
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ala I ShararaAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Ali H HarbAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Fayez S SarkisAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Jean M ChalhoubAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Rami BadreddineAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Fadi H MouradAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Mahmoud OthmanAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
Omar MasriAla I Sharara, Ali H Harb, Fayez S Sarkis, Jean M Chalhoub, Rami Badreddine, Fadi H Mourad, Mahmoud Othman, Omar Masri, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, 11-0236/16-B Beirut, Lebanon.
American University of Beirut · LB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare the efficacy and palatability of 4 L polyethylene glycol electrolyte (PEG) plus sugar-free menthol candy (PEG + M) vs reduced-volume 2 L ascorbic acid-supplemented PEG (AscPEG).

methodsIn a randomized controlled trial setting, ambulatory patients scheduled for elective colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either PEG + M or AscPEG, both split-dosed with minimal dietary restriction. Palatability was assessed on a linear scale of 1 to 5 (1 = disgusting; 5 = tasty). Quality of preparation was scored by assignment-blinded endoscopists using the modified Aronchick and Ottawa scales. The main outcomes were the palatability and efficacy of the preparation. Secondary outcomes included patient willingness to retake the same preparation again in the future and completion of the prescribed preparation.

resultsOverall, 200 patients were enrolled (100 patients per arm). PEG + M was more palatable than AscPEG (76% vs 62%, P = 0.03). Completing the preparation was not different between study groups (91% PEG + M vs 86% AscPEG, P = 0.38) but more patients were willing to retake PEG + M (54% vs 40% respectively, P = 0.047). There was no significant difference between PEG + M vs AscPEG in adequate cleansing on both the modified Aronchick (82% vs 77%, P = 0.31) and the Ottawa scale (85% vs 74%, P = 0.054). However, PEG + M was superior in the left colon on the Ottawa subsegmental score (score 0-2: 94% for PEG + M vs 81% for AscPEG, P = 0.005) and received significantly more excellent ratings than AscPEG on the modified Aronchick scale (61% vs 43%, P = 0.009). Both preparations performed less well in afternoon vs morning examinations (inadequate: 29% vs 15.2%, P = 0.02).

conclusion4 L PEG plus menthol has better palatability and acceptability than 2 L ascorbic acid- PEG and is associated with a higher rate of excellent preparations; Clinicaltrial.gov identifier: NCT01788709.

Indexed as

CandyColonoscopyAdministration, OralAdultAgedAscorbic AcidCatharticsFemaleFlavoring AgentsHumansLebanonMaleMentholMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPolyethylene GlycolsAscorbic AcidCatharticsFlavoring AgentsMentholPolyethylene GlycolsBowel preparationColonoscopyEfficacyMentholTolerability

Identifiers

PMID25684963
PMCPMC4323474
OpenAlexW2011199413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.