Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39743778›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2025

Bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy: standard regimen with 2 L polyethylene glycol versus 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate.

Riccardo Caccia, Alessandro Rimondi, Luca Elli, Matilde Topa, Flaminia Cavallaro, Carmine Gentile, Lucia Scaramella, Nicoletta Nandi, Reena Sidhu, Pinhas Eidler and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. 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

12 authors.

Riccardo CacciaDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Alessandro RimondiDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Luca ElliDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Matilde TopaDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Flaminia CavallaroGastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Carmine GentileDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Lucia ScaramellaGastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Nicoletta NandiDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Reena SidhuAcademic Unit of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK.
Pinhas EidlerDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Maurizio VecchiDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Gian Eugenio TontiniDepartment of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

Italian Ministry of Health-Current research IRCCS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsOptimization of bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) is debated. Guidelines recommend 2 L of iso-osmolar polyethylene glycol (PEG) to improve SBCE visibility. We compared the efficacy of the standard 2 L PEG solution with a 1 L PEG plus ascorbate (PEG-ASC) preparation, which has already been established for large-bowel preparation.

methodsBetween October 2020 and February 2022, patients undergoing SBCE were assigned to receive 2 L PEG or 1 L PEG-ASC bowel preparation on an even- or odd-day basis. Bowel cleanliness was evaluated using the small bowel mucosal visibility scoring system (SBMVSS).

resultsFollowing propensity score matching using a random forest method, two comparable populations of patients treated with 2 L PEG (n=74, male 41%, 53±17 years) and 1 L PEG-ASC (n=74, male 42%, 55±21 years) were obtained from the original cohort of 221 consecutive SBCE patients. Our results showed a trend towards more frequent adequate mucosal visibility with 1 L PEG-ASC compared to 2 L PEG (small bowel mucosal visibility ≥2 in all three small bowel tertiles, p=0.07), as per the SBMVSS score. No significant differences were observed in the diagnostic yield (p=1.00), visibility score=9 (p=0.85), SBCE completeness (p=0.33), or adequate mucosal visibility in each tertile (p=0.61, p=0.74, and p=0.70 for the first, second, and third tertiles, respectively).

conclusionsOur study suggests the non-inferiority of the 1 L PEG-ASC solution over the standard 2 L PEG for SBCE preparation.

Indexed as

Bowel preparationCapsule endoscopySmall bowel

Identifiers

PMID39743778
PMCPMC11983103

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.