Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40087241›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2025

Bowel Cleansing Effectiveness of Sulfate-Based Tablet Versus Sulfate-Based Solution for Outpatient Colonoscopy: A Retrospective Noninferiority Study.

Hamid Reza Moein, Brandon Karimian, Thomas W Edwards, Mohamed Seisa, Jarred Kendziorski, Rahul Patel, Madeline Vithya Barnaba Durairaj, Lauren Shelton, Samuel Addo, Claire Rinaldo and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Hamid Reza MoeinDepartment of Gastroenterology, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA. Hamidreza.moein@unchealth.unc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5171-1767
Brandon KarimianDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Thomas W Edwards
Mohamed SeisaDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Jarred KendziorskiDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Rahul PatelDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Madeline Vithya Barnaba DurairajDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Lauren SheltonDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Samuel AddoDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Claire RinaldoDepartment of Internal Medicine, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Gerald W MankDepartment of Gastroenterology, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.
Suneel MohammedDepartment of Gastroenterology, UNC Health Blue Ridge, Morganton, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBowel preparation quality is one of the most important quality measures in colonoscopy. Sulfate-based tablets (Sodium sulfate, magnesium sulfate, potassium chloride) and sulfate-based solution (sodium, magnesium, potassium sulfate) are commonly used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy. However, there has been no comparison between these two.

aimsTo compare the bowel preparation quality and colonoscopy quality metrics between sulfate-based tablet sand solution, both given as a split-dose.

methodsA retrospective, cross-sectional study in an outpatient endoscopy suite. Patients who chose sulfate-based tablet or solution were included in this study. Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS) was used for measurement of bowel preparation quality. Primary endpoint is defined as adequate bowel preparation (any segment score ≥ 2). Secondary endpoints included total BBPS score, adenoma detection rate (ADR), withdrawal time, and cecal intubation rate. A noninferiority test was conducted.

resultsA total of 517 patients were included (161 in sulfate-based tablet and 356 in sulfate-based solution group). Sulfate-based tablet resulted in more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate-based solution (98.1 vs. 93.8%; p = 0.044). Total BBPS score was 7.14 ± 1.03 and 7.04 ± 1.22 in tablet and solution groups, respectively (p = 0.366). ADR (37.2 vs. 40.3%; p = 0.681), cecal intubation rate, and withdrawal time were not statistically different between groups.

conclusionsSplit-dose sulfate-based tablet is noninferior to split-dose sulfate-based solution in bowel cleansing for colonoscopy. Sulfate tablets may lead to more adequate bowel preparation as compared to sulfate solution likely due to better tolerance. There was no significant difference in colonoscopy quality metric measures between sulfate-based tablet and solution.

Indexed as

CatharticsColonoscopyMagnesium SulfateSulfatesAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPotassium ChlorideRetrospective StudiesTabletsCatharticsMagnesium SulfatePotassium Chloridepotassium sulfatesodium sulfateSulfatesTabletsBowel preparation qualityColonoscopyOral sodium sulfateSulfate-based solutionSulfate-based tablet

Identifiers

PMID40087241

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.