Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36588527›Full record

Trial reportGut and liver2023

Oral Sulfate Solution Is as Effective as Polyethylene Glycol with Ascorbic Acid in a Split Method for Bowel Preparation in Patients with Inactive Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized, Multicenter, and Single-Blind Clinical Trial.

Ji Min Lee, Kang-Moon Lee, Ho Suk Kang, Ja Seol Koo, Hyun Seok Lee, Seok-Hoo Jeong, Jung Ho Kim, Dae Bum Kim

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gut and liver, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Ji Min LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3995-3944
Kang-Moon LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2850-4553
Ho Suk KangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3808-2385
Ja Seol KooDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1202-075X
Hyun Seok LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9288-0321
Seok-Hoo JeongDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Catholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9197-1184
Jung Ho KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6944-473X
Dae Bum KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0830-3375
The Catholic University of Korea St. Vincent's Hospital · KRCatholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital · KRGachon University Gil Medical Center · KRHallym University Sacred Heart Hospital · KRKorea University · KRKyungpook National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Low-volume preparations for colonoscopy are gaining attention for their higher acceptability. However, the efficacy and safety of oral sulfate solution (OSS) preparations in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) has not been well known. Therefore, we aimed to compare OSS and 2-L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEG+Asc) for bowel preparation in inactive UC. Methods: A multicenter, randomized, single-blind study was conducted at six tertiary referral hospitals in Korea. Outpatients with UC who had stable disease activity were randomly allocated to the OSS group or the 2-L PEG+Asc group for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. The study outcomes included treatment efficacy, safety, tolerability, and acceptability. Bowel cleansing was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale and rated as successful cleansing if the score was ≥6. Patient acceptance and tolerability were assessed using a 4-point ordinal scale. Additionally, disease activity and laboratory data before and after colonoscopy were evaluated to check for safety. Results: The OSS and 2-L PEG+Asc groups included 92 and 93 participants, respectively. No significant between-group difference was noted in successful cleansing (OSS [96.7%] vs 2-L PEG+Asc [97.8%], p=0.64). Moreover, the safety, acceptance, and tolerability were not significantly different (all p>0.05). Furthermore, no significant changes were found in serum electrolytes or disease activity in either group. Conclusions: OSS is effective for colonoscopy cleansing, has acceptable tolerability, and does not affect disease activity; thus, it can be used safely for bowel preparation in patients with inactive UC.

Indexed as

Colitis, UlcerativePolyethylene GlycolsAscorbic AcidCatharticsColonoscopyHumansSingle-Blind MethodSulfatesAscorbic AcidCatharticsPolyethylene GlycolsSulfatesColitisColonoscopyOral sulfate solutionPatient safetyPolyethylene glycolulcerative

Identifiers

PMID36588527
PMCPMC10352068
OpenAlexW4313424584

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.