Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33869599›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2021

Impact of simethicone on bowel cleansing during colonoscopy in Chinese patients.

Hu Zhang, Jing Liu, Song-Lin Ma, Man-Lin Huang, Yan Fan, Min Song, Jing Yang, Xiao-Xia Zhang, Qi-Long Song, Jing Gong and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2021. 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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. Article
  2. Shortening Oral Simethicone-to-Colonoscopy Interval Increases Bowel Preparation Quality.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hu ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Jing LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Song-Lin MaDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Man-Lin HuangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Yan FanDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Min SongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Jing YangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Xiao-Xia ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Qi-Long SongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Jing GongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Ping-Xiao HuangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China.
Heng ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430014, Hubei Province, China. 497697662@qq.com.
Central Hospital of Wuhan · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFour-liter polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions are effective for bowel cleansing, but their large volume might hinder patient compliance. Due to the unique features of Asians, 4 L PEG might be a suboptimal bowel preparation in predominantly ethnically Asian countries. In view of this, a balance should be achieved between the volume and effectiveness. The ideal bowel cleansing regimen for a colonoscopy has yet to be determined in a Chinese population.

aimTo compare the cleansing efficacy of 3 L PEG plus simethicone with 4 L PEG.

methodsA total of 291 patients were randomly allocated to two groups: Group 1 (

resultsAlthough there were no significant differences in the total BBPS score or the adequate rate of bowel preparation between the two groups, the BBPS score of the right-side colon was significantly higher in the 3-SP group (2.37 ± 0.54

conclusionThree-liter PEG shows satisfactory bowel cleansing despite the decrease in dosage, and addition of simethicone with better bubble elimination and enhanced patient acceptance offers excellent potential impact on the detection of proximal adenomas in Chinese patients.

Indexed as

Bowel preparationCleansing efficacyColonoscopyPolyethylene glycolSimethicone

Identifiers

PMID33869599
PMCPMC8026841
OpenAlexW3149242051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.