Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26679172›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2016

Sodium phosphate versus polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy bowel preparation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ji Cheng, Kaixiong Tao, Xiaoming Shuai, Jinbo Gao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. The Effects and Adverse Reactions of Different Bowel Cleansers on Gut Microbiota After Colonoscopy.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Iatrogenic Splenic Laceration Presenting as Syncope.Case reports in emergency medicine · 2018
    Article
  9. A Modified Bowel Preparation Regimen for Colonoscopy Providing the Patients' Satisfaction and Convenience.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017
    Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ji ChengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1277 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
Kaixiong TaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1277 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
Xiaoming ShuaiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1277 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
Jinbo GaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1277 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. jinbogaowhuh@126.com.
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNUnion Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdequate bowel cleansing is of great importance for a high-quality colonoscopy examination. Nevertheless, whether sodium phosphate or polyethylene glycol is a gold standard agent for bowel preparation is still under debate. In consideration of the clinical needs, we thus performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials concerning the comparison between both regimens. The efficacy, safety and acceptability of each regimen are major indicators to measure and appraise.

methodsBy searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases, 15 original trials published from 2000 to 2014 were included as eligible studies. We carried out data extraction and subsequent pooling analysis for each indicator in a standard manner. Sensitivity analysis was performed by elimination of low-quality trials, while a funnel plot and Egger's test were employed to analyze the publication bias across studies.

resultsOur pooling analysis revealed that patients undergoing sodium phosphate as a cleansing agent displayed better acceptability, compliance, cleansing scores, preparation taste, polyp detection rate and less adverse effects including nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain (P < 0.05). In terms of procedure time, adequate preparation rate and electrolyte concentration, there was no significant difference between both regimens (P > 0.05). The pooling analysis offered stable conclusions which were verified by our sensitivity analysis. There was no publication bias across studies as a symmetric funnel plot was demonstrated and the result of Egger's test was P = 0.56.

conclusionsRegarding preparation efficacy, safety and acceptability, sodium phosphate was a better agent than polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy bowel cleansing, with its advantages of higher efficacy, better tolerability and acceptability as well as comparable safety.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyCatharticsHumansPatient PreferencePhosphatesPolyethylene GlycolsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCatharticsPhosphatesPolyethylene Glycolssodium phosphateBowel preparationColonoscopyMeta-analysisPolyethylene glycolRandomized controlled trialsSodium phosphate

Identifiers

PMID26679172
OpenAlexW2218648789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.