Trial reportJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2025
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of 0.8-L Versus 2-L Polyethylene Glycol-Ascorbic Acid Solutions in Colonoscopy Preparation: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of 0.8-L Versus 2-L Polyethylene Glycol-Ascorbic Acid Solutions in Colonoscopy Preparation: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimHigh-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions are associated with low patient compliance, whereas low-volume alternatives pose higher risks of adverse events. We compared a new 0.8-L PEG-ascorbic acid solution containing simethicone to a 2-L PEG-ascorbic acid solution.
methodsIn this prospective, investigator-blinded study, 137 outpatients from five centers were randomized into three groups: Group A (0.8-L PEG-ascorbic acid with a split-dose regimen), Group B (0.8-L PEG-ascorbic acid on the same day as the colonoscopy), and Group C (2-L PEG-ascorbic acid with a split-dose regimen). The primary outcome was the cleansing efficacy, assessed using the Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS). Secondary outcomes included bubble score, polyp and adenoma detection rates, patient satisfaction, tolerability, and safety.
resultsAll groups achieved 100% successful preparation (HCS grades A and B). Group B had a higher HCS grade in the ascending colon than Group C (3.2 vs. 3.0, p = 0.01). Groups A and B showed better bubble scores than Group C (p < 0.0001). Polyp and adenoma detection rates were similar across the groups. Group B demonstrated the highest satisfaction score (139.1 ± 76.7), followed by Group A (129.8 ± 64.9) and Group C (125.6 ± 60.0), with no significant differences. The tolerability and safety parameters were similar between the groups.
conclusionsThe novel 0.8-L PEG-ascorbic acid solution was effective, safe, and highly tolerable, showing noninferiority to the 2-L PEG-ascorbic acid solution. The same-day regimen showed a tendency toward better cleansing efficacy in the ascending colon and higher patient satisfaction.
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.