Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31624941›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2020

Comparison of bowel-cleansing efficacy of split-dose and same-day dose bowel preparation for afternoon colonoscopy in patients with gastrectomy: a prospective randomized study.

Tae-Geun Gweon, Cheal Wung Huh, Jeong Seon Ji, Chang Hyun Kim, Jin-Jo Kim, Seung-Man Park

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. 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

6 authors.

Tae-Geun GweonDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Cheal Wung HuhDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jeong Seon JiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Chang Hyun KimDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea. gospel4@catholic.ac.kr.
Jin-Jo KimDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seung-Man ParkDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA split dose (SPD) of purgative is the recommended bowel-preparation method for colonoscopy, although for colonoscopy scheduled for the afternoon, a same-day dose (SDD) of purgative is recommended. However, it has not been determined whether SPD or SDD is better in patients with gastrectomy who are at high risk of suboptimal bowel cleansing. We compared the bowel-cleansing efficacy of SPD and SDD regimens in patients with gastrectomy who underwent colonoscopy in the afternoon.

methodsThis was a prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded study. For the SDD group, polyethylene glycol (PEG) was ingested on the day of colonoscopy starting at 7 AM. In the SPD group, 2 L PEG was ingested at 9 PM the day before colonoscopy, and the remaining 2 L from 10 AM on the day of colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was performed from 1:30 PM. Before colonoscopy, the participants completed questionnaires asking about bowel-movement kinetics, adverse events, tolerability, overall satisfaction, and willingness to reuse the protocol. The bowel-cleansing efficacy was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale.

resultsA total of 193 subjects were included (SDD, 95; SPD, 98). The rate of successful bowel cleansing was comparable between the two groups (SDD, 92.6% vs. SPD, 95.9%; P = 0.37). The incidence of adverse events (nausea, vomiting, bloating, abdominal pain, and dizziness/headache) was also comparable between the two groups. However, sleep disturbance was higher in the SPD group (SDD, 10.5% vs. SPD, 25.5%; P = 0.01). Tolerability did not differ between the SDD and SPD groups (satisfaction, P = 0.11; willingness to reuse, P = 0.29).

conclusionsThe bowel-cleansing efficacy, safety profile, and patient tolerability of SDD and SPD were comparable. Both SDD and SPD regimens are feasible bowel-preparation methods for patients with gastrectomy who undergo colonoscopy in the afternoon.

trial registrationClinical trial registration number: KCT0002699.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyGastrectomyCatharticsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansKineticsMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeCatharticsBowel-cleansing efficacyColonoscopyGastrectomyGastric cancerSame-day bowel preparation

Identifiers

PMID31624941

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.