Trial reportClinical and translational gastroenterology2026
Efficacy of 1 L PEG Ascorbate vs Sodium Picosulfate With Magnesium Citrate Bowel Preparations for Capsule Colonoscopy and Pan-Intestinal Capsule Endoscopy: A Prospective Study.
Trial report in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCapsule colonoscopy (CC) and pan-intestinal capsule endoscopy ("panendoscopy") require effective bowel cleansing; however, evidence on ultra-low-volume regimens is lacking. This study compared the efficacy of 1 L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc) vs sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) in CC and panendoscopy procedures.
methodsIn this prospective, single-center, researcher-blinded, randomized trial, 220 consecutive adult outpatients referred for CC or panendoscopy were assigned 1:1 to receive split-dose PEG-Asc or SPMC. Primary outcomes were adequate bowel cleansing and procedure completion, while secondary outcomes included tolerability and clinically relevant endoscopic findings.
resultsAdequate bowel cleansing was achieved in 70.0% of the PEG-Asc group vs 47.1% of the SPMC group ( P = 0.001). PEG-Asc achieved higher rates of excellent segmental cleansing in the right (32.6% vs 9.4%; P < 0.001) and transverse colon (38.8% vs 15.6%; P < 0.001). Overall completion rates were similar between regimens (PEG-Asc 68.9% vs SPMC 66.7%; P = 0.742), but with CC procedures achieving 62.7% and panendoscopy 87.2% ( P = 0.004). Tolerability was higher with SPMC, reflected by fewer reports of nausea (27.6% vs 42.2%; P = 0.035) and vomiting (9.2% vs 24.4%; P = 0.005), and a greater proportion of patients rating the preparation as "easy" (34.7% vs 21.1%; P = 0.039). Clinically relevant findings, including polyps ≥6 mm, were similar across both groups. DISCUSSION: PEG-Asc provides superior bowel cleansing for CC and panendoscopy, whereas SPMC is better tolerated. These findings support PEG-Asc as the first-line ultra-low-volume bowel preparation for capsule-based procedures.
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.