AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (636.8 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Clinical Medicine | Publishing Language: Chinese | Open Access

Efficacy of 2 L versus 3 L polyethylene glycol in bowel preparation: a real-world study

Jiaojun LI1,2Xianhao TAN2,3Chen ZHANG2Yifeng LIU2Lin JIANG2Xiaobin SUN2Jing SHAN2( )
School of Clinical Medicine, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan
Department of Gastroenterology, Chengdu Third People’s Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan
College of Clinical Medicine, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

To compare the efficacy of 2 L and 3 L polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolyte solution for bowel preparation in a real-world setting.

Methods

A real-world, single-center cohort study was conducted on the individuals undergoing colonoscopy in Department of Gastroenterology of Chengdu Third People’s Hospital between May and October 2023. Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, they were given 2 L (n=4684) and 3 L (n=3700) PEG electrolyte solution for bowel preparation. The primary outcome indicator was the adequacy of bowel preparation by Boston bowel preparation score (BBPS). Secondary outcome indicators included the BBPS score, polyp detection rate (PDR), tolerability, compliance, and incidence of adverse events.

Results

The adequacy rate of bowel preparation was 94.35% in the 3 L group, significantly higher than that of the 2 L group (91.29%, P<0.001). The 3 L group obtained a higher BBPS score then the 2 L group (6.92±1.06 vs 6.81±1.14, P<0.001). But there was no statistical difference in the PDR between the 2 groups (P=0.073). And the rate of PEG completion (P=0.810), administration of low residue diet as required (P=0.094) or use of dimethicone (P=0.072) were comparable between the 2 groups. However, the incidences of vomiting (4.5% vs 3.2%, P=0.002), abdominal discomfort (5.0% vs 3.9%, P=0.011) and sleep disturbance (18.0% vs 14.6%, P<0.001) were obviously higher in the 3 L group than the 2 L group.

Conclusion

In a real-world setting, 2 L PEG is a considerably safe and effective regimen for bowel preparation.

CLC number: R195.1; R574; R981.2 Document code: A

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Army Medical University
Pages 255-261

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
LI J, TAN X, ZHANG C, et al. Efficacy of 2 L versus 3 L polyethylene glycol in bowel preparation: a real-world study. Journal of Army Medical University, 2025, 47(3): 255-261. https://doi.org/10.16016/j.2097-0927.202407055

4

Views

0

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 14 July 2024
Revised: 05 August 2024
Published: 15 February 2025
© 2025 Journal of Army Medical University

This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).