Transvaginal ultrasound with bowel preparation versus transvaginal ultrasound with bowel preparation and water contrast for diagnosing Recto-Sigmoid endometriosis. A systematic review and Meta-Analysis.

Transvaginal ultrasound is effective in diagnosing endometriosis involving the rectosigmoid bowel. Some authors suggest enhanced detection of rectosigmoid involvement with bowel preparation. Conversely, conflicting views argue that bowel preparation may not improve diagnostic precision, yielding similar results to rectal water contrast. No existing meta-analysis compares these approaches. Our study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of transvaginal ultrasound with bowel preparation, with and without rectal water contrast. Studies published between 2000 and 2023 were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science. From 561 citations, we selected nine studies to include in this meta-analysis. The study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). The mean prevalence of endometriosis rectosigmoid was 43.6% (range 17,56-76,66%) in the group with bowel preparation and 64,80% (50,0-83,60%) for the group with bowel preparation and rectal water contrast. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% and 94% for bowel preparation and 92% and 95% and for bowel preparation with water contrast. We conclude that, there was no significant difference between performing transvaginal ultrasound with intestinal preparation with and without water contrast. In clinical practice, the absence of a significant difference between these methods should be taken into account when making recommendations.

The Machine Learning Model for Predicting Inadequate Bowel Preparation Before Colonoscopy: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is a critical diagnostic tool for colorectal diseases; however, its effectiveness depends on adequate bowel preparation (BP). This study aimed to develop a machine learning predictive model based on Chinese adults for inadequate BP. METHODS: A multicenter prospective study was conducted on adult outpatients undergoing colonoscopy from January 2021 to May 2023. Data on patient characteristics, comorbidities, medication use, and BP quality were collected. Logistic regression and 4 machine learning models (support vector machines, decision trees, extreme gradient boosting, and bidirectional projection network) were used to identify risk factors and predict inadequate BP. RESULTS: Of 3,217 patients, 21.14% had inadequate BP. The decision trees model demonstrated the best predictive capacity with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 in the validation cohort. The risk factors at the nodes included body mass index, education grade, use of simethicone, diabetes, age, history of inadequate BP, and longer interval. DISCUSSION: The decision trees model we created and the identified risk factors can be used to identify patients at higher risk of inadequate BP before colonoscopy, for whom more polyethylene glycol or auxiliary medication should be used.

Bowel preparation for elective colectomy in Crohn's disease: results from a global cohort study using the NSQIP database.

AIM: The role of bowel preparation before colectomy in Crohn's disease patients remains controversial. This retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes associated with mechanical and antibiotic colon preparation in patients diagnosed with Crohn's disease undergoing elective colectomy. METHOD: Data were collected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participant user files from 2016 to 2021. A total of 6244 patients with Crohn's disease who underwent elective colectomy were included. The patients were categorized into two groups: those who received combined colon preparation (mechanical and antibiotic) and those who did not receive any form of bowel preparation. The primary outcomes assessed were the rate of anastomotic leak and the occurrence of deep organ infection. Secondary outcomes included all-cause short-term mortality, clinical-related morbidity, ostomy creation, unplanned reoperation, operative time, hospital length of stay and ileus. RESULTS: Combined colon preparation was associated with significantly reduced risks of anastomotic leak (relative risk 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.95, P = 0.021) and deep organ infection (relative risk 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83, P < 0.001). Additionally, patients who underwent colon preparation had lower rates of ostomy creation, shorter hospital stays and a decreased incidence of ileus. However, there was no significant difference in all-cause short-term mortality or the need for unplanned reoperation between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study shows that mechanical and antibiotic colon preparation may have clinical benefits for patients with Crohn's disease undergoing elective colectomy.

One-day versus three-day low-residue diet bowel preparation regimens before colonoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although studies have shown that the quality of bowel preparation with low-residue diet (LRD) is as effective as that of clear fluid diet (CLD), there is currently no consensus on how long an LRD should last. The aim of this study was to compare a 1-day versus 3-day LRD on bowel preparation before colonoscopy. METHODS: A systematic review search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane database from inception to April 2023. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared 1-day with 3-day LRD bowel cleansing regiments for patients undergoing colonoscopy. The rate of adequate bowel preparation, polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, tolerability, willingness to repeat preparation, and adverse events were estimated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We also performed meta-analysis to identify risk factors and predictors of inadequate preparation. RESULTS: Four studies published between 2019 and 2023 with 1927 participants were included. The present meta-analysis suggested that 1-day LRD was comparable with 3-day LRD for adequate bowel preparation (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.65-1.21; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%; P = 0.52). The polyp detection rate (OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.14; P = 0.52; I2 = 23%; P = 0.27) and adenoma detection rate (OR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71-1.08; P = 0.21; I2 = 0%; P = 0.52) were similar between the groups. There were significantly higher odds of tolerability in patients consuming 1-day LRD compared with 3-day LRD (OR 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13-2.39; P < 0.01; I2 = 47%; P = 0.15). In addition, constipation was identified as the independent predictor of inadequate preparation (OR 1.98; 95% CI, 1.27-3.11; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%; P = 0.46). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that a 1-day LRD was as effective as a 3-day CLD in the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy and significantly improved tolerability of patients. In addition, constipation is an independent risk factor of poor bowel preparation, and the duration of LRD in patients with constipation still needs further clinical trials.

Design and validation of an artificial intelligence system to detect the quality of colon cleansing before colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients' perception of their bowel cleansing quality may guide rescue cleansing strategies before colonoscopy. The main aim of this study was to train and validate a convolutional neural network (CNN) for classifying rectal effluent during bowel preparation intake as "adequate" or "inadequate" cleansing before colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients referred for outpatient colonoscopy were asked to provide images of their rectal effluent during the bowel preparation process. The images were categorized as adequate or inadequate cleansing based on a predefined 4-picture quality scale. A total of 1203 images were collected from 660 patients. The initial dataset (799 images), was split into a training set (80%) and a validation set (20%). The second dataset (404 images) was used to develop a second test of the CNN accuracy. Afterward, CNN prediction was prospectively compared with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) in 200 additional patients who provided a picture of their last rectal effluent. RESULTS: On the initial dataset, a global accuracy of 97.49%, a sensitivity of 98.17% and a specificity of 96.66% were obtained using the CNN model. On the second dataset, an accuracy of 95%, a sensitivity of 99.60% and a specificity of 87.41% were obtained. The results from the CNN model were significantly associated with those from the BBPS (P<0.001), and 77.78% of the patients with poor bowel preparation were correctly classified. CONCLUSION: The designed CNN is capable of classifying "adequate cleansing" and "inadequate cleansing" images with high accuracy.

1-L polyethylene glycol + ascorbic acid versus sodium picosulfate + magnesium citrate bowel preparations for colonoscopy: effectiveness and safety

Background: adequate bowel preparation is crucial for the protective effect of colonoscopy. Commonly used preparation regimens like polyethylene glycol (PEG) or sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) have shown similar results in clinical trials, but low-volume PEG + ascorbic acid (1-L PEG + ASC) versus SPMC have never been compared in a real-life setting. Aim: to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of 1-L PEG + ASC versus SPMC in a real-life setting for the overall population, for patients aged ≥ 65 years, and males versus females. Methods: out-patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent colonoscopy for any indication were randomly assigned to the 1-L PEG + ASC or SPMC group. Using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), the primary endpoints were the bowel cleansing success of the overall colon and right colon, as well as high-quality (HQ) cleansing. Furthermore, the effectiveness and safety outcomes for age groups and males versus females were compared. Results: 1-L PEG + ASC showed significantly better bowel cleansing success than SPMC. Particularly remarkable is the HQ cleansing reached with 1-L PEG + ASC compared with SPMC (55.5 % versus 25.4 % in the overall colon, and 58.7 % versus 27.2 % in the right colon). 1-L PEG + ASC was equally effective for men and women while SPMC showed significant differences between genders (men had worse bowel cleansing). Age did not affect the cleansing effectiveness. 1-L PEG + ASC versus SPMC showed significant differences in tolerance and safety; women also had significantly worse tolerance than men for both solutions, but these did not affect the quality of bowel cleansing. Conclusions: in our real-life setting, 1-L PEG + ASC offered better adequate and HQ bowel cleansing than SPMC, achieving excellent cleansing quality, regardless of gender or tolerance. (AU)

Evaluation of bowel preparation regimens for colonoscopy including a novel low volume regimen (Plenvu): CLEANSE study.

BACKGROUND: Poor bowel preparation is the leading cause of failed colonoscopies and increases costs significantly. Several, split preparation, 2 day regimens are available and recently, Plenvu, a low-volume preparation which can be given on 1 day has been introduced. AIMS: Assess efficacy and tolerability of commonly used purgative regimens including Plenvu. METHOD: In this service evaluation, patients undergoing screening colonoscopy at St Mark's Hospital, London (February 2020-December 2021) were provided Plenvu (1 or 2 days), Moviprep (2 days) or Senna & Citramag (2 days).Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, fluid volumes and procedure times were recorded. A patient experience questionnaire evaluated taste, volume acceptability, completion and side effects. RESULTS: 563 patients were invited to participate and 553 included: 218 Moviprep 2 days, 108 Senna & Citramag 2 days, 152 Plenvu 2 days and 75 Plenvu 1 day.BBPS scores were higher with Plenvu 1 and 2 days vs Senna & Citramag (p=0.003 and 0.002, respectively) and vs Moviprep (p=0.003 and 0.001, respectively). No other significant pairwise BBPS differences and no difference in preparation adequacy was seen between the groups.Patients rated taste as most pleasant with Senna & Citramag and this achieved significance versus Plenvu 1 day and 2 days (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively) and versus Moviprep (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: BBPS score was higher for 1 day and 2 days Plenvu versus both Senna & Citramag and Moviprep. Taste was not highly rated for Plenvu but it appears to offer effective cleansing even when given as a same day preparation.

Peri-colonoscopy Implications of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Therapy: A Mini-review of Available Evidence.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are a class of oral glucose-lowering agents commonly used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. With increased use, there has been an increase in the incidence of the rare but life-threatening complication of euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis. A common but underappreciated precipitant is colonoscopy. In this work, we outline the pathophysiology of the interaction between colonoscopy and SGLT2i use, the evidence regarding SGLT2i use in the periprocedural setting and Australian Diabetes Society guidelines.

Oral mannitol for bowel preparation: a dose-finding phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Successful bowel preparation (BP) for colonoscopy depends on the instructions, diet, the laxative product, and patient adherence, which all affect colonoscopy quality. Nevertheless, there are no laxatives which combine effectiveness, safety, easy self-administration, good patient acceptance, and low cost. However, mannitol, a sugar alcohol, could be an attractive candidate for use in clinical practice if it is shown to demonstrate adequate efficacy and safety. AIMS: The present phase II dose-finding study compared three doses of mannitol (50, 100, and 150 g) to identify the best dose to be used in a subsequent phase III study. METHODS: The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, caecal intubation rate, adherence, acceptability, and safety profile, including measurement of potentially dangerous colonic gas concentrations (CH4, H2, O2), were considered in all patients. A weighted algorithm was used to identify the best mannitol dose for use in the subsequent study. RESULTS: The per-protocol population included 60 patients in the 50 g group, 54 in the 100 g group, and 49 in the 150 g group. The 100 g dose was the best as it afforded optimal colon cleansing efficacy (94.4% of patients had adequate BP), adherence, acceptability, and safety, including negligible gas concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that the colon cleansing efficacy and safety of mannitol were dose dependent. Conversely, gas concentrations were not dose dependent and negligible in all patients. Combined evaluation of efficacy, tolerability, and safety, using a weighted algorithm, determined that mannitol 100 g was the best dose for the phase III study.

Patient education by smartphones for bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We aim to evaluate the effect of smartphone education on the bowel preparation quality of patients undergoing colonoscopy by meta-analysis. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials using smartphones to educate patients on bowel preparation for colonoscopy were screened from the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases from inception to August 31, 2021. After extracting the data, Review Manager software was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12 randomized controlled trials with 4165 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were 2060 patients in the smartphone group, including 1784 patients with adequate bowel preparation, with a rate of 86.6%, and 2105 patients in the control group, including 1614 patients with adequate bowel preparation, with a rate of 76.7%, and pooled risk ratio (RR) was 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.23, P < 0.01). Eight included studies reported the adenoma detection rate. The adenoma detection rate in the smartphone group was 26.2%, and the rate in the control group was 19.3%, with an RR of 1.29 (95% CI: 1.03-1.62, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Using smartphones to educate patients on bowel preparation for colonoscopy improved the quality of bowel preparation and increased the adenoma detection rate.

Randomized trial of oral sulfate solution versus polyethylene glycol-ascorbic acid for bowel cleansing in elderly people.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The efficacy and safety of the recently introduced low-volume purgatives in elderly people are not well known. Therefore, in this trial, we aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of two low-volume agents, oral sulfate solution (OSS) and 2-L polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc), in elderly people. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, multicenter, non-inferiority trial was performed at three university-affiliated hospitals in South Korea. Outpatients aged 65-80 years, who underwent elective colonoscopy, were enrolled. The primary outcome was the rate of adequate bowel preparation assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. RESULTS: A total of 199 subjects were randomized into the OSS (n = 99) or the 2-L PEG-Asc (n = 100) group. Of them, 189 subjects were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (OSS group 95 vs PEG-Asc group 94). The proportion of adequate bowel preparation was 89.5% (85/95) in the OSS group and 93.6% (88/94) in the 2-L PEG-Asc group. OSS was not inferior to 2-L PEG-Asc according to the prespecified non-inferiority margin of -15% (95% confidence interval for the difference, -12.1 to 3.8). Vomiting (11.6% vs 2.1%) and thirst (24.2% vs 11.7%) were more common in the OSS group than in the 2-L PEG-Asc group. CONCLUSIONS: OSS is an effective low-volume purgative that is non-inferior to 2-L PEG-Asc in elderly people. Both the low-volume agents were identified to be well tolerated and safe in the healthy elderly population.

Split-dose low-volume polyethylene glycol is non-inferior but less preferred compared with same-day bowel preparation for afternoon colonoscopy.

Currently, the same-day polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution (PEG-ELS) regimen is particularly recommended for afternoon colonoscopy as an alternative to the split-dose regimen in western countries. However, in Japan, the split-dose regimen has never been used as a standard colonoscopy preparation regimen. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of split-dose PEG containing ascorbic acid (ASC) with same-day single dose PEG-ASC in Japan.This was a single-blinded, non-inferiority, two-center, randomized, controlled study. In-hospital patients were randomized to the same-day regimen or the split regimen using a web-based registry system. The same-day group was instructed to take 5 mL of sodium picosulfate in the evening, and on the day of the colonoscopy, they took 1.5 L of PEG-ASC. The split group was instructed to take 1 L of PEG-ASC before the day of colonoscopy, followed by another 1 L of PEG-ASC on the day of colonoscopy. Bowel cleansing was evaluated by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale.A total of 153 patients were randomized to either the same-day group (n=78, males 60.0%, mean age 62.7 years) or the split group (n=75, 61.3%, 61.9 years). The rates of successful bowel cleansing were 83.3% in the same-day group vs. 92.0% (83.4%-97.0%) in the split group, P=0.10). No serious adverse events occurred in the study population. However, more patients in the same-day group were willing to repeat the same preparation regimen (P<0.001). The split-dose regimen was not inferior to the same-day regimen with respect to the efficacy of bowel preparation, but the patients preferred the same-day regimen.

Sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate versus 4L split-dose polyethylene glycol for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy in high fibre diet African patients.

INTRODUCTION: an adequate bowel preparation is essential for good mucosal inspection during colonoscopy. This study aims to compare the efficacy of two validated oral lavage solutions for colonoscopy preparation in African patients. METHODS: a prospective observational study of patients undergoing colonoscopy in a referral endoscopy facility in Port Harcourt, Nigeria, using sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SPMC) and 4L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG). Variables collated were sociodemographic, primary indication, comorbidities, Aronchick bowel preparation scale, polyp/adenoma detection, caecal intubation and outcome. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS version 20. RESULTS: one hundred and twenty-four patients received PEG prior to colonoscopy and SPMC in 175 patients. The age range was from 22 to 92 years; mean age of 53.8 ± 14.2 years for PEG group and 55.3 ± 13.2 years for SPMC group (p=0.361). There were 215 males and 84 females. An excellent/good bowel preparation scale was recorded in 77 (62%) PEG group and 130 (74.3%) for SPMC group (p=0.592). PEG was predominantly used in the early years of endoscopists practice with the odds ratio (OR) of no polyp detection in the PEG vs SPMC groups as 1.64 (confidence interval CI 1.06-2.55) versus 0.76 (CI 0.62-0.92), respectively (p=0.016). For no adenoma detection, OR was 4.18 (CI 1.12-15.60) versus OR 0.63 (CI 0.52-0.75), respectively (p=0.012). CONCLUSION: there is similar efficacy profile using either split volume PEG or SPMC prior to colonoscopy in these African patients. Polyp and adenoma detection rates are highly dependent on the expertise of the endoscopist.

The Use of a PEG/Ascorbate Booster Following Standard Bowel Preparation Improves Visualization for Capsule Endoscopy in a Randomized, Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The increasing use of capsule endoscopy (CE) to examine the gastrointestinal tract highlights the need to establish intestinal preparations that ensure optimal visualization while maximizing patient adherence. Thus, we assessed whether bowel preparation involving dietary restriction and a booster regimen produces adequate CE visualization in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, prospective study of CE procedures at 2 tertiary-care centers. Patients were allocated to 3 groups: group 1 followed a clear liquid diet and fasting-based bowel preparation for the exploration (n = 55); group 2 followed the same procedure as group 1 and then ingested 1 L of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)/ascorbic acid booster solution when the capsule reached the small intestine (n = 55); and group 3 followed the same procedure but ingesting only 0.5 L of the booster solution (n = 56). The quality of visualization and the average gastric, orocecal and small-bowel transit times were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients participated in the study. Significantly higher quality of visualization (Park score) was obtained in group 3 (2.28 ± 0.59) than in group 1 (1.84 ± 0.54, P < .001), while there were no significant differences in the average gastric (range: 36.58- 48.32 min, P = .277), orocecal (range: 322.58-289.45 min, P = .072), and small-bowel transit time (range: 280.71-249.95 min, P = .286) between the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Following a clear liquid diet and fasting-based bowel preparation for CE exploration, administering a booster solution of PEG/ascorbic acid after the capsule had reached the small intestine improves mucosal visualization and cleansing without affecting capsule transit times.

Effectiveness and safety of 1L PEG-ASC preparation for colonoscopy in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of bowel cleansing is a key element for high-quality colonoscopy. Recently, a 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (PEG-ASC) solution has been introduced, but effectiveness and safety of this preparation have not been assessed in IBD patients. This study aims to evaluate effectiveness and safety of 1 L PEG-ASC solution in patients with IBD compared to controls. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data on a cohort of 411 patients performing a colonoscopy after preparation with 1 L PEG-ASC, consecutively enrolled in 5 Italian centres. RESULTS: Overall, 185/411 (45%) were patients with IBD and 226/411 (55%) served as controls. A significantly higher cleansing success was achieved in IBD patients (92.9% vs 85.4%, p = 0.02). The multiple regression model showed that presence of IBD (OR=2.514, 95%CI=1.165-5.426; P = 0.019), lower age (OR=0.981, 95%CI=0.967-0.996; P = 0.014), split preparation (OR=2.430, 95%CI=1.076-5.492; P = 0.033), absence of diabetes (OR=2.848, 95%CI=1.228-6.605; P = 0.015), and of chronic constipation (OR=3.350, 95%CI=1.429-7.852; P = 0.005), were independently associated with cleansing success. The number of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (51 vs 62%, p = 0.821), and of patients with TEAEs (22.2% vs 21.2%, p = 0.821), were similar in IBD patients and in controls, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study support the effectiveness and safety of 1 L PEG-ASC solution in IBD patients, which may improve the definition of endoscopic outcomes both in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.

Mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation versus no bowel preparation in right and left colectomy: subgroup analysis of MOBILE trial.

BACKGROUND: In retrospective series, mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) has been reported to reduce surgical-site infections (SSIs) after colectomy compared with no bowel preparation (NBP). METHOD: This was a subgroup analysis of a multicentre randomized trial that included patients scheduled for elective colectomy. The MOABP group underwent mechanical bowel preparation, and took 2 g neomycin and 2 g metronidazole orally during the day before surgery. The NBP group did not undergo bowel preparation. Patients were categorized according to the side of resection (right versus left colectomy), and these subgroups compared for postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Among 217 patients undergoing right colectomy (106 in MOABP and 111 in NBP group), SSI was detected in seven (7 per cent) and 10 (9 per cent) patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95 per cent c.i. 0.26 to 1.95; P = 0.510), anastomotic dehiscence in two (2 per cent) and two (2 per cent) patients (OR 1.05, 0.15 to 7.58; P = 1.000), and the mean(s.d.) Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score was 9.4(12.9) and 10.5(18.0) (mean difference -1.09; 95 per cent c.i. -5.29 to 3.11; P = 0.608) in the MOABP and NBP groups respectively. Among 164 patients undergoing left colectomy (84 in MOABP and 80 in NBP group), SSI was detected in five (6 per cent) and eight (10 per cent) patients (OR 0.57, 0.18 to 1.82; P = 0.338), anastomotic dehiscence in four (5 per cent) and five (6 per cent) patients (OR 0.75, 0.19 to 2.90; P = 0.742), and the CCI score was 10.2(13.1) and 6.5(11.0) (mean difference 3.68, -0.06 to 7.42; P = 0.053) in the MOABP and NBP groups respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MOABP did not decrease the rate of SSI or complications in patients undergoing either right or left colectomy compared with NBP.

A randomized controlled trial of high volume simethicone to improve visualization during capsule endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of simethicone before capsule endoscopy is unknown. Prior studies have reported inconsistent cleansing, with some showing improved visualization only in the proximal small intestine. We hypothesized a higher volume of simethicone may improve cleansing and diagnostic yield, especially in the distal small bowel. METHODS: A phase III randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing high volume (1125 mg simethicone in 750 ml water) versus standard volume (300 mg simethicone in 200 ml water) solutions, both at 1.5 mg/ml. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation, defined as a KOrea-CanaDA (KODA) score >2.25, overall and stratified by the proximal and distal half of the small bowel. Secondary outcomes included mean KODA score, diagnostic yield, completion rate, and adverse events. All analyses were intention-to-treat. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients were randomized (mean (SD) age 58.7 (15.7), 54% female) and the most common indication was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (71.7%). Adequate cleansing was achieved in 39 (50%) patients in the high volume group and in 39 (48%) patients in the standard volume group (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76-1.43, p = 0.82), with no differences observed in the proximal half (71% vs 64%, p = 0.40) or the distal half -of the small bowel (36% vs. 37%, p = 0.88). There was no differences in the mean (SD) KODA score (2.20 (0.41) vs. 2.18 (0.44), p = 0.73), diagnostic yields (53% vs. 56%, p = 0.71), or completion rates (both 95%). One adverse event, nausea, occurred in the control group. CONCLUSION: High volume simethicone does not improve visualization during capsule endoscopy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial: NCT02334631.

Systemic versus Oral and Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis (SOAP) study in colorectal surgery: prospective randomized multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus regarding the role of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OABP) in reducing postoperative complications in colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of OABP given in addition to MBP in the setting of a prospective randomized trial. METHODS: Patients awaiting elective colorectal surgery in four Hungarian colorectal centres were included in this multicentre, prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded study. Patients were randomized to receive MBP with or without OABP (OABP+ and OABP- groups respectively). The primary endpoints were surgical-site infection (SSI) and postoperative ileus. Secondary endpoints were anastomotic leak, mortality, and hospital readmission within 30 days. RESULTS: Of 839 patients assessed for eligibility between November 2016 and June 2018, 600 were randomized and 529 were analysed. Trial participation was discontinued owing to adverse events in seven patients in the OABP+ group (2.3 per cent). SSI occurred in eight patients (3.2 per cent) in the OABP+ and 27 (9.8 per cent) in the OABP- group (P = 0.001). The incidence of postoperative ileus did not differ between groups. Anastomotic leakage occurred in four patients (1.6 per cent) in the OABP+ and 13 (4.7 per cent) in the OABP- (P = 0.02) group. There were no differences in hospital readmission (12 (4.7 per cent) versus 10 (3.6 per cent); P = 0.25) or mortality (3 (1.2 per cent) versus 4 (1.4 per cent); P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: OABP given with MBP reduced the rate of SSI and AL after colorectal surgery with anastomosis, therefore routine use of OABP is recommended.