Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32124060›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2021

Sodium phosphate is superior to polyethylene glycol in constipated patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jerry T Dang, Muhammad Moolla, ThucNhi Tran Dang, Ashley Shaw, Chunhong Tian, Shahzeer Karmali, Richard Sultanian

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Constipation and colonoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jerry T DangDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. dang2@ualberta.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-8659-0934
Muhammad MoollaFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
ThucNhi Tran DangDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Ashley ShawDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Chunhong TianDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Shahzeer KarmaliDepartment of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Richard SultanianDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
University of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConstipation is an important and highly prevalent predictor of inadequate bowel preparation during colonoscopy. In North America, between 2 and 28% of the general population suffer from constipation. Despite the high prevalence of constipation, to our knowledge, no meta-analysis on the optimal bowel preparation for constipated patients has been performed. We aimed to systematically review the literature to determine the ideal bowel preparation regiment for patients with chronic constipation.

methodsA comprehensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science) was performed. We included studies that assessed the quality of bowel preparation in constipated patients receiving different agents prior to colonoscopy. The primary outcome was colon cleanliness. Secondary outcomes included tolerability of the bowel preparation and serious adverse events.

resultsPreliminary database search yielded 1581 articles after duplicates were removed. After screening of the titles and abstracts using the exclusion criteria, 358 full-text articles were retained. Full-text articles were reviewed and eight studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included for qualitative synthesis. Three randomized controlled trials identified a total of 1636 constipated patients, of whom 225 were eligible for meta-analysis. Of those, 107 (47.6%) received NaP and 118 (52.4%) received PEG. Patients receiving NaP before colonoscopy had a higher chance of a successful bowel preparation than patients receiving PEG (OR 1.87, CI 1.06 to 3.32, P = 0.003). In the studies comparing PEG to NaP, two found that NaP resulted in greater tolerability of the bowel preparation and one study found that PEG resulted in superior tolerability.

conclusionsIn chronically constipated patients undergoing colonoscopy, the use of NaP may result in superior colonic cleanliness when compared to PEG, however, quality of evidence was low. Further high-quality studies are required to delineate the optimal bowel preparation in patients with constipation.

Indexed as

CatharticsColonoscopyConstipationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhosphatesPolyethylene GlycolsCatharticsPhosphatesPolyethylene Glycolssodium phosphateBowel preparationColonoscopyConstipationPolyethylene glycol (PEG)Sodium phosphate

Identifiers

PMID32124060
OpenAlexW3010029686

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.