ArticleCureus2025
Impact of Bowel Preparation Type on Colonoscopy Quality and Adenoma Detection: A Comparative Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Colonoscopy is the gold standard for CRC screening, but its effectiveness depends on bowel preparation quality. This study compares polyethylene glycol (PEG)-based MoviPrep (Norgine Limited, Hengoed, UK) and sodium picosulfate-based Picolax (Ferring GmbH, Kiel, Germany) in terms of bowel cleansing quality, caecal and ileal intubation rates, and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Methods This retrospective observational study analysed 6,921 colonoscopies performed at University Hospital Crosshouse between June 2020 and June 2023. Bowel preparation quality was assessed using the modified Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale, categorised as Excellent, Good, Fair, or Inadequate. ADR was determined by histologically confirmed adenomas. Statistical comparisons between the two groups were performed using chi-square tests. Results MoviPrep was used in 6,219 (89.9%) of cases, while Picolax was used in 702 (10.1%) cases. MoviPrep was associated with a lower inadequate preparation rate (343 (5.5%) vs. 63 (9.0%)), a higher caecal intubation rate (3,675 (59.1%) vs. 307 (43.7%)) and ileal intubation rate (1,119 (18.0%) vs. 81 (11.5%)), and a higher ADR (2,295 (36.9%) vs. 167 (23.8%)). Conclusion MoviPrep demonstrated superior bowel cleansing, higher completion rates, and greater adenoma detection, supporting its use as a preferred bowel preparation method for colonoscopy in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.