Accidental Intravenous Administration of Simethicone in a 4-Year-Old Patient: A Case Report.

Simethicone is an antiflatulent medication exclusively administered orally, thus its systemic effects remain unknown. We present a case of an inadvertent intravenous administration of simethicone to a 4-year-old patient, precipitating respiratory difficulty, cyanosis, and altered mental status. The patient's condition improved rapidly with appropriate interventions, leading to discharge in a fully recovered state. To date, only one documented instance of intravenous simethicone administration exists in medical literature.

Effect of alverine citrate plus simethicone in colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Colonoscopy is the standard procedure for screening, and surveillance of colorectal cancer, including the treatment for colonic lesions. Colonic spasm is an important problem from colonoscopy that affects both surgeons and patients. The spasm also might be the cause of longer cecal intubation time, difficulty of the procedure, and increased pain. Previous reports indicated that antispasmodic agents can decrease such symptoms. Therefore, we conducted this study to investigate the cecal intubation time of antispasmodic agents. A single blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted from 01/11/2020 to 31/08/2021. One hundred four patients were allocated to antispasmodic agent group and control group, in 1:1 ratio. The efficacy of median (range) cecal intubation time showed similar results of 5 (2, 14) and 5 (2, 15) minutes with no statistically significant difference. The mean scores of all domains i.e., pain, spasm, cleanliness, and difficulty were better in the antispasmodic agent group about 2.6 (1.4), 1.8 (0.8), 2.4 (0.9), and 2.0 (0.9), respectively, than control group but there were spasm and cleanliness showed statistically significant difference. Moreover, the satisfaction scores showed better efficacy in decreased spasm, decreased difficulty, and increased cleanliness than control group. Prescribing of antispasmodic drugs before colonoscopy might be the choice of treatment for the patients. The antispasmodic drugs will be beneficial to both of the patient and the doctor.

Effect of simethicone for the management of early abdominal distension after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a multicenter retrospective propensity score matching study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether simethicone expediates the remission of abdominal distension after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: This retrospective study involved LC patients who either received perioperative simethicone treatment or not. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize bias. The primary endpoint was the remission rate of abdominal distension within 24 h after LC. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify independent risk factors affecting the early remission of abdominal distension after LC. Subsequently, a prediction model was established and validated. RESULTS: A total of 1,286 patients were divided into simethicone (n = 811) and non-simethicone groups (n = 475) as 2:1 PSM. The patients receiving simethicone had better remission rates of abdominal distension at both 24 h and 48 h after LC (49.2% vs. 34.7%, 83.9% vs. 74.8%, respectively), along with shorter time to the first flatus (14.6 ± 11.1 h vs. 17.2 ± 9.1 h, P < 0.001) compared to those without. Multiple logistic regression identified gallstone (OR = 0.33, P = 0.001), cholecystic polyp (OR = 0.53, P = 0.050), preoperative abdominal distention (OR = 0.63, P = 0.002) and simethicone use (OR = 1.89, P < 0.001) as independent factors contributing to the early remission of abdominal distension following LC. The prognosis model developed for predicting remission rates of abdominal distension within 24 h after LC yielded an area under the curve of 0.643 and internal validation a value of 0.644. CONCLUSIONS: Simethicone administration significantly enhanced the early remission of post-LC abdominal distension, particularly for patients who had gallstones, cholecystic polyp, prolonged anesthesia or preoperative abdominal distention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2200064964 (24/10/2022).

The Effect of Oral Simethicone in a Bowel Preparation in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Colonoscopy Setting: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Current guidelines suggest adding oral simethicone to bowel preparation for colonoscopy. However, its effect on key quality indicators for screening colonoscopy remains unclear. The primary aim was to assess the rate of adequate bowel preparation in split-dose high-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG), with or without simethicone. Methods: This is an endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial, including patients scheduled for colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test. Patients were randomly assigned to 4 L of PEG split dose (PEG) or 4 L of PEG split dose plus 500 mg oral simethicone (PEG + simethicone). The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, the preparation quality regarding bubbles using the Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS), ADR, CIR, and the intraprocedural use of simethicone were recorded. Results: We included 191 and 197 patients in the PEG + simethicone group and the PEG group, respectively. When comparing the PEG + simethicone group versus the PEG group, no significant differences in adequate bowel preparation rates (97% vs. 93%; p = 0.11) were found. However, the bubble scale score was significantly lower in the PEG + simethicone group (0 [0] versus 2 [5], p < 0.01), as well as intraprocedural use of simethicone (7% vs. 37%; p < 0.01). ADR (62% vs. 61%; p = 0.86) and CIR (98% vs. 96%, p = 0.14) did not differ between both groups. Conclusion: Adding oral simethicone to a split-bowel preparation resulted in a lower incidence of bubbles and a lower intraprocedural use of simethicone but no further improvement on the preparation quality or ADR.

Introdução: As normas de orientação atuais sugerem a adição de simeticone oral à preparação intestinal para colonoscopia. Contudo, o seu efeito nos indicadores de qualidade no âmbito da colonoscopia de rastreio não está comprovado. O objetivo principal foi avaliar a taxa de preparação adequada usando polietilenoglicol (PEG) em dose dividida com e sem simeticone oral. Métodos: Estudo randomizado controlado, cego para o endoscopista, incluindo doentes admitidos para colonoscopia após teste fecal imunoquímico positivo. Os doentes foram aleatoriamente alocados para 4 litros de PEG em dose dividida (PEG) ou 4 litros de PEG em dose divida + simeticone oral (PEG + simeticone). Foram avaliados: Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), qualidade da preparação relativa às bolhas através da Colon Endoscopic Bubble Scale (CEBuS) scale, ADR, CIR e uso de simeticone durante o procedimento. Resultados: Foram incluídos 191 e 197 doentes nos grupos PEG + simeticone e PEG, respetivamente. Comparando os grupos PEG + simeticone versus PEG, não se registaram diferenças de significado estatístico relativamente à taxa de preparação intestinal adequada (97% vs. 93%; p = 0,01) mas o score da escala de bolhas foi significativamente inferior no grupo PEG + simeticone [0 (0) versus 2 (5), p < 0.01], assim como o uso de simeticone durante o procedimento (7% vs. 37%; p < 0,01). A ADR (62% vs. 61%; p = 0,86) e a CIR (98% vs. 96%, p = 0,14) não diferiram significativamente entre os dois grupos, respetivamente. Discussão/Conclusão: Adicionar simeticone oral à preparação intestinal em dose dividida permitiu menor incidência de bolhas e menor utilização de simeticone durante o procedimento, mas não se associa a melhor preparação intestinal ou melhor ADR.

Drug-loaded vegan gummies for personalized dosing of simethicone: A feasibility study of semi-solid extrusion-based 3D printing of pectin-based low-calorie drug gummies.

Chewable gummies are an attractive dosage form for all age groups because of their appearance and texture. Although, this dosage form has been highly preferred administering nutraceuticals, its application in the pharmaceutical sector is worth exploring. In this study, simethicone (SMT), an OTC drug prescribed for anti-flatulence was incorporated in pectin- based, low-calorie, 3D printed gummies. Semi-solid extrusion (SSE)-based 3D printing was used to dispense personalized dose of SMT i.e 40 mg for children and 125 mg for adults. Formulation optimization was carried out based on the texture profile of the gummies, using a texture analyzer. The inks were thoroughly characterized for their rheological behavior since it is a critical attribute for SSE-based 3D printing. Printing parameters like the printing speed, layer height and the type of the nozzle were optimized based on the printing accuracy achieved. The printed gummies were further evaluated for their disintegration time, drug content, weight variation, water activity and total microbial count. SSE-based 3D printing was found to be an effective tool to print pectin-based shear thinning gels for accurate drug dispensing. The texture profile of the printed gummies was comparable to the gummies prepared by conventional method as well as the marketed samples.

To degas or not to degas? The effectiveness of pharmaceuticals in reducing the impact of bowel volume variations during liver SBRT treatment.

The indications for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) continue to expand in the management of liver cancer due to the improved rates of local control with acceptable normal tissue toxicity. Changes in internal anatomy, such as the bowel, may negatively impact the precision of treatment delivery of SBRT liver treatment by influencing daily image matching. Institutions have developed various approaches to promoting bowel volume consistency. One such strategy is the administration of pharmaceuticals. The administration of pharmaceuticals, such as Simethicone, has been adopted by the Princess Alexandra Hospital Radiation Oncology Department (ROPAIR) as a method to promote consistency in the amount of bowel gas observed in liver cancer patients. This case series examines a group of patients treated at ROPAIR with liver SBRT to determine whether current practices effectively reduce the impact of bowel volume variations for liver cancer patients. Initial observations from this hypothesis generating research suggest potential improved consistency of the small bowel's anatomical position for liver SBRT patients who were administered Simethicone (Bowel bag dice similarity coefficient - Simethicone group = 0.79-0.92, Standard group = 0.24-0.93). However, it appeared that this strategy alone may not be entirely effective achieving consistency in the amount of bowel gas present throughout the duration of treatment. Further investigation into the refinement of liver SBRT pre-treatment preparation is therefore recommended.

Efficacy and Safety of Pea Protein and Xyloglucan Versus Simethicone in Functional Abdominal Bloating and Distension.

BACKGROUND: Functional Abdominal Bloating and Distension (FABD) is a multifaceted condition related in part to trapped gas, with changes in the intestinal barrier and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), which lead to gas production. Currently, there are no treatments targeting the etiology of FABD. METHODS: This double-blind, multicenter, randomized study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a product containing xyloglucan and pea proteins (XG + PP) compared with simethicone, both administered orally (three times daily) for 20 consecutive days. Eighty-eight patients with FABD were randomly assigned to the two groups in a 1:1 ratio. Primary outcome was safety; secondary outcomes were (i) efficacy in alleviating the symptoms of FABD and (ii) efficacy in reducing SIBO, as assessed by hydrogen breath test (HBT). RESULTS: No Adverse Events or Serious Unexpected Adverse Reactions were reported during the study. XG + PP showed a faster onset of action and a significant reduction in bloating and abdominal pain compared with simethicone. At Day 20, XG + PP drastically reduced abdominal girth when compared with simethicone, with an average reduction of 4.7 cm versus 1.8 cm. At Day 20, the XG + PP arm showed a significant reduction in HBT compared to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the evidence that FABD patients may benefit from a XG + PP-based treatment that acts on etiology and not just the symptoms.

Simethicone use in drug-induced sleep endoscopy improves visibility.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of simethicone, a defoaming agent, on improving visibility during drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). METHODS: The study was a retrospective case-series study on patients with OSA who failed positive airway pressure (PAP) treatment. Patient parameters were recorded including age, BMI, neck and abdominal circumference, and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). Comparisons were made between DISE procedures performed with and without the administration of simethicone. Visibility during DISE was independently graded by two surgeons, and inter-rater reliability was assessed. RESULTS: Simethicone significantly improved DISE visibility (p = 0.03). "Best visibility" was achieved in 55% of cases with simethicone compared to 27% without simethicone (p = 0.02). Sub-analysis showed that only simethicone administration had a significant effect on visibility (p = 0.02). Inter-rater reliability between the grading surgeons was strong (Cohen-Kappa score 0.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that simethicone enhances DISE visibility for OSA surgical planning. Further research should explore optimizing simethicone administration timing and the potential clinical implications for surgical outcomes and patient care.

Pre-medication with simethicone and N-acetyl cysteine for improving mucosal visibility during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Diagnostic performance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be compromized due to adherent mucus and foam. In this study, we aimed at assessing the impact of premedication on mucosal visibility during endoscopy. METHODS: This is a double-blinded (patient and investigator), randomized trial conducted at a tertiary care centre. Patients were randomized into four groups: A (water), B (simethicone [S]), C (N-acetyl cysteine [NAC]), D (S + NAC). Premedication solutions were administered 10-30 minutes before endoscopy and mucosal visibility graded from 1 (best) to 4 (worst) (1 best, 4 worst). Total mucosal visibility scores (TMVS) from six sites ranged from 6 (best) to 24 (worst) points. The primary outcome of study was comparison of TMVS between simethicone and combination (S + NAC) premedication groups. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and impact of endoscopy timing on TMVS. RESULTS: Total 800 patients (39 years, 68.8% males) were randomized into four groups. Median TMVS were significantly lower in groups B (7 [6-8]) and D (8 [6-9]) as compared to A (11 [9-13]) and C (10 [8-12]). Proportion of cases with adequate gastric mucosal visibility (score < 7) was 26% in group A, 71% in group B, 36% in group C and 79% in group D. There was no difference in TMVS in groups A and C (p = 0.137). TMVS were significantly lower in late (> 20-30 minutes) vs. early (10-20 minutes) endoscopy sub-group (8 [7-11] vs, 9 ([7-11], p = 0.001). However, TMVS were similar between group B and group D in early endoscopy group (p = 0.451). There was no significant difference in the lesion detection rate among the different premedication drugs (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Premedication with simethicone or combination (simethicone and NAC) significantly improves mucosal visibility during EGD. If early endoscopy is indicated, simethicone provides similar mucosal visibility and may be an effective alternative to combined premedication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05951712.

Inadequate gastric preparation and its associated factors for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy.

Goals: To explore factors associated with inadequate gastric preparation for MCE. Background: Factors associated with inadequate gastric preparation for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) remains unclear. Study: Data of patients who underwent MCE from June 2021 to July 2022 were prospectively collected. The gastric cleanliness score (GCS) of the six stomach regions (gastric cardia, fundus, body, angulus, antrum, and pylorus) was recorded. Patients with GCS score ≥18 were defined as the adequate preparation. Factors related to inadequate gastric preparation were analyzed using a logistic regression model with estimated odds ratios (OR). Results: The mean GCS score of 211 patients was 17.01 ± 2.82. In the multivariable analysis, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use (OR 3.57; 95% CI 1.69-7.95; p < 0.01) and premedication time after administering simethicone <30 min (OR 2.86; 95% CI 1.10-7.39; p = 0.03) were independent risk factors for inadequate gastric preparation. Comparing the gastric cleanliness of different locations, the median GCS of the lower stomach [10.00, IQR (9.50, 11.00)] was significantly higher than that of the upper stomach [7.00, IQR (6.00, 8.00)] (p <0.001). Conclusion: PPI use and inadequate premedication time (<30 min) may reduce the quality of gastric preparation for MCE. The type, dose, duration of medication, and discontinuation time of PPIs was well worth further exploration. Appropriate control of the type and time of premedication may be the key to improving overall gastric cleanliness.

Guidelines in Practice: Processing Flexible Endoscopes.

Flexible endoscopes allow surgeons and proceduralists to view patients' internal organs through small incisions or natural orifices. These devices may be difficult to clean and dry adequately, and the formation of biofilm can further complicate effective cleaning. The updated AORN "Guideline for processing flexible endoscopes" provides perioperative personnel with evidence-based best practice recommendations on a variety of concepts associated with this topic. This article provides an overview of the guideline and discusses recommendations for point-of-use treatment, transport, cleaning (including verification and drying), and storage of flexible endoscopes. It also includes a scenario that illustrates the importance of adequately drying and storing flexible endoscopes. When processing flexible endoscopes, personnel should adhere to the endoscope and processing equipment manufacturers' instructions for use. Perioperative nurses should review the guideline in its entirety and implement recommendations in practice settings where flexible endoscopes are used.

Towards the Continuous Manufacturing of Liquisolid Tablets Containing Simethicone and Loperamide Hydrochloride with the Use of a Twin-Screw Granulator.

Continuous manufacturing is becoming the new technological standard in the pharmaceutical industry. In this work, a twin-screw processor was employed for the continuous production of liquisolid tablets containing either simethicone or a combination of simethicone with loperamide hydrochloride. Both active ingredients present major technological challenges, as simethicone is a liquid, oily substance, and loperamide hydrochloride was used in a very small amount (0.27% w/w). Despite these difficulties, the use of porous tribasic calcium phosphate as a carrier and the adjustment of the settings of the twin-screw processor enabled the optimization of the characteristics of the liquid-loaded powders and made it possible to efficiently produce liquisolid tablets with advantages in physical and functional properties. The application of chemical imaging by means of Raman spectroscopy allowed for the visualization of differences in the distribution of individual components of the formulations. This proved to be a very effective tool for identifying the optimum technology to produce a drug product.

Effect of an Antacid (Aluminum Hydroxide/Magnesium Hydroxide/Simethicone) or a Proton Pump Inhibitor (Omeprazole) on the Pharmacokinetics of Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide (TBP-PI-HBr) in Healthy Adult Subjects.

Tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide (TBP-PI-HBr) is a novel oral carbapenem prodrug being developed for the treatment of serious bacterial infections. This open-label, 3-period, fixed sequence study evaluated the effect of gastric acid-reducing agents, aluminum hydroxide/magnesium hydroxide/simethicone, and omeprazole on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tebipenem (TBP), the active moiety, following coadministration with immediate release TBP-PI-HBr during fasting. In Period 1, subjects received a single oral dose of TBP-PI-HBr 600 mg (2 × 300 mg tablets). In Period 2, subjects received a single oral dose of aluminum hydroxide 800 mg/magnesium hydroxide 800 mg/simethicone 80 mg suspension co-administered with a single dose of TBP-PI-HBr 600 mg. In Period 3, subjects received a single oral dose of omeprazole 40 mg once daily over 5 days, followed by single dose administration of TBP-PI-HBr 600 mg on day 5. In each period, whole blood samples were obtained prior to, and up to 24 h, following TBP-PI-HBr dose administration in order to characterize TBP PK. A 7-day washout was required between periods. Twenty subjects were enrolled and completed the study. Following co-administration of TBP-PI-HBr with either aluminum hydroxide/magnesium hydroxide/simethicone or omeprazole, total TBP exposure (area under the curve [AUC]) was approximately 11% (geometric mean ratio 89.2, 90% confidence interval: 83,2, 95.7) lower, and Cmax was 22% (geometric mean ratio 78.4, 90% confidence interval: 67.9, 90.6) and 43% (geometric mean ratio 56.9, 90% confidence interval: 49.2, 65.8) lower, respectively, compared to administration of TBP-PI-HBr alone. Mean TBP elimination half-life (t1/2) was generally comparable across treatments (range: 1.0 to 1.5 h). Concomitant administration of TBP-PI-HBr with omeprazole or aluminum hydroxide/magnesium hydroxide/simethicone is not expected to impact the efficacy of TBP-PI-HBr, as there is minimal impact on TBP plasma AUC, which is the pharmacodynamic driver of efficacy. Co-administration was generally safe and well tolerated.

Cleaning effect and tolerance of 16 bowel preparation regimens on adult patients before colonoscopy: a network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). Before a colonoscopy, an adequate bowel preparation (BP) is required. Currently, more novel regimens with different effects have been proposed and used successively. This network meta-analysis aims to compare the cleaning effects and patients' tolerability of several BP regimens. METHODS: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials including sixteen kinds of BP regimens. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The outcomes of this study were bowel cleansing effect and tolerance. RESULTS: We included a total of 40 articles with 13,064 patients. For the primary outcomes, polyethylene glycol (PEG) + ascorbic acid (Asc) + simethicone (Sim) (OR, 14.27, 95%CrI, 2.68-127.87) regimen is ranked first in Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). PEG + Sim (OR, 2.0, 95%CrI 0.64-6.4) regimen is ranked first in Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (OBPS), but without significant differences. For the secondary outcomes, PEG + Sodium Picosulfate/Magnesium Citrate (SP/MC) (OR, 4.88e + 11, 95%CrI, 39.56-1.82e + 35) regimen is the best in cecal intubation rate(CIR). PEG + Sim (OR,1.5, 95%CrI, 1.0-2.2) regimen is ranked first in adenoma detection rate(ADR). Senna (OR, 3.23, 95%CrI, 1.04-9.97) and SP/MC (OR, 249.91, 95%CrI, 78.49-958.19) regimens are ranked first in abdominal pain and willingness to repeat, respectively. There is no significant difference in cecal intubation time (CIT), polyp detection rate (PDR), nausea, vomiting, and abdominal bloat. CONCLUSION: PEG + Asc + Sim regimen is more effective at cleaning the bowel. PEG + SP/MC will be helpful to increase CIR. For ADR, PEG + Sim regimen will be more helpful. In addition, PEG + Asc + Sim is the least likely to cause abdominal bloat, while Senna regimen is more likely to cause abdominal pain. Patients prefer to re-use the SP/MC regimen for bowel preparation.

Use of Simethicone After Capsule Ingestion and Its Impact on the Quality of Small Bowel Video Capsule Endoscopy: A Pilot Study.

Background Small bowel capsule endoscopy is a tool to visualize the small bowel (SB) for conditions such as obscure bleeding. Various studies have been performed to compare various bowel preparation regimens in terms of small bowel transit time (SBTT), small bowel visualization quality (SBVQ), and diagnostic yield (DY). Literature suggests that using polyethylene glycol (PEG) prep is significantly better compared to clear liquid and overnight fast in terms of SBVQ and DY. Other investigators have tried to assess the efficacy of adding simethicone to the bowel preparation regimen which seems to improve SBVQ. However, no studies have been done to assess the results of simethicone ingestion after capsule swallowing. We intend to give patients simethicone one hour after capsule ingestion for two consecutive hours and compare results for SBVQ pre-and post-ingestion groups. The objective of this study is to compare the effect of simethicone on SBVQ in pre- and post-capsule ingestion groups. Methodology This prospective, randomized controlled trial included patients who were scheduled for outpatient capsule endoscopy at Albany Medical Center (AMC) Endoscopy Suite. Patients were divided into the control group, group 1, and the treatment group (group 2). The control group followed the standard AMC pre-capsule protocol that included PEG 238 g the evening prior. Group 1 included patients who received 3 mL of simethicone (20 mg/0.3 mL) 20 minutes prior to ingesting the capsule. The treatment group (group 2) included patients who ingested simethicone 3 mL 20 minutes prior to capsule swallowing, 3 mL after one hour, and 1.5 mL after another hour, totaling 7.5 mL of simethicone. Data regarding SBVQ for every patient were evaluated as an individual zone score from 1-3 points, each in proximal, middle, and distal SB based on the SBTT. A cumulative score of 3-9 was given after adding the three zones. These scores were derived using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. Data analysis was done using Microsoft Excel software. Results There were six patients in the control group, eight in group 1, and eight in the treatment group (group 2). Proximal, middle, and distal SB did not show any significant difference between their SBVQ scores. Moreover, the total combined score also showed no statistical difference in the SBVQ score. Conclusions There were no statistically significant differences in the SBVQ neither while looking at the cumulative score nor individual segmental score of the entire SB. However, this is only a pilot project with a small number of subjects and results may differ in future studies with increased power.

Taking Oral Sulfate Tablets with Simethicone for Bowel Preparation Leads to Higher Adenoma Detection Rate than Polyethylene Glycol: A Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Efficient bowel preparation is essential for preventing colorectal cancer by improving endoscopic adenoma detection. Tablet for bowel preparation containing sulfate salts, OSTs (oral sulfate tablets), has been developed and it is gaining more popularity. However, its efficacy compared to standard preparation agent, PEG-AA (polyethylene glycol), has not been well discovered. We assessed the efficacy of PEG and OSTs using a real-time clinical data warehouse (CDW) model. METHODS: We performed a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis of consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy who received PEG-AA or OSTs prior to colonoscopy at a tertiary academic hospital. The endoscopic records of 992 adult patients were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical data warehouse collected data including bowel preparation, insertion time, observation time, and the detection of polyps and adenomas. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to reveal the factors associated with endoscopic outcomes. RESULTS: Among 992 patients included in the study, 770 and 222 patients received PEG-AA and OSTs, respectively. Among the propensity score-matched population (n = 1897), OSTs resulted in better bowel cleansing quality (8.16 vs 7.84, p = 0.014) and a higher adenoma detection rate (38.6% vs 27.1%, p = 0.003). Using PEG-AA, older age, inadequate bowel preparation (BBPS score < 6) and endoscopy by fellows were found to be factors associated with poor adenoma detection. In the elderly over 65 years of age, a significant difference in cleansing quality between the two groups (7.21 vs 8.19, p < 0.001) was found, but its impact on ADR was not prominent (49.5% vs 45.4%, p = 0.653). CONCLUSIONS: OSTs with simethicone achieved better endoscopic cleanliness, improving adenoma detection rate compared to the conventional PEG-AA protocol. The synergistic effect of both the convenience of taking tablets and the reduction of intraluminal bubble by adjunctive simethicone improves the clinical efficacy of colonoscopy.

The utility of lighted magnification and borescopes for visual inspection of flexible endoscopes.

INTRODUCTION: Infections have been linked to damaged or contaminated endoscopes with visible defects. Endoscope processing standards and guidelines state endoscopes should be visually inspected every time they are used. This study evaluated a new visual inspection program using magnification and borescopes in an endoscopy department that had not previously utilized these tools. METHODS: Site personnel were given visual inspection tools and training before systematically examining fully processed endoscopes twice during a 2-month period. A risk assessment protocol was used to determine whether endoscopes required recleaning, repair, or other action. Findings were documented using log sheets, photographs, and videotapes. RESULTS: Visible damage and residue or debris were observed in 100% of 25 endoscopes at both assessments, and 76% required repair. Defects at baseline included scratches (88%); channel shredding or peeling (80%); adhesive band disintegration (80%); residual soil or debris (white 84%; black 68%; brown 40%; yellow/green 36%; and orange/red 8%); retained fluid (52%); and dents (40%). Findings were similar at follow-up. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Visual inspection with magnification and borescopes identified actionable defects that could interfere with processing effectiveness in 100% of endoscopes. Infection preventionists have a critical role to play in supporting processing personnel now that standards, guidelines, and manufacturer instructions recommend enhanced visual inspection of every endoscope, every time.

Prospective cohort study to evaluate premedication with simethicone and n-acetilcysteine for upper diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy

Introduction: The use of premedication for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) is not widely established in western countries. The primary aim of the study was to compare gastric visibility according to the total visibility score (TVS). The secondary aim was to assess complications, diagnostic yield, endoscopic procedure time, sedation dose and patient satisfaction. Methods: A single center prospective cohort study was performed of consecutive adults undergoing an UGE in the afternoon working shift. After completing enrolment in the control group, patients were administered 200 mg simethicone and 500 mg N-acetylcysteine diluted in 100 ml of water >15 minutes before the procedure. All procedures were recorded and a single, blinded endoscopist evaluated the TVS after recruitment of both cohorts. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the Spanish translation of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy satisfaction questionnaire. Results: 205 patients were included in the study, 103 females (50.2%) with a median age of 54.8-years (IQR: 41.2-65.2). 104 were enrolled to the control group and 101 to the intervention group. Patients receiving premedication presented a higher rate of adequate (74.3% vs 45.2; difference 95% CI: 16,3-41,9%, p<0.001) and excellent gastric visibility (23.8% vs 7.7%; difference 95% CI: 6,3-25,8%, p=0.002). Propofol dose was similar, although the median procedure time was lower in the group of no intervention [5 (IQR: 4-7) vs 6 minutes (IQR: 5-7); p=0.03]. Procedure related adverse events were similar, except that patient without premedication experienced more nausea episodes. Major and minor endoscopic findings and the satisfaction questionnaire showed no differences between both groups. Conclusion: Patients receiving premedication with simethicone and N-acetylcysteine had a better gastric visibility score, without any increase in adverse events or affecting the patients’ satisfaction (AU)

Preparation of small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) with simethicone: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is disputed about optimal bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the role of simethicone in intestinal preparation for SBCE. METHODS: We searched four databases (PubMed, web of science, Embase, and Scopus databases) for relevant studies. Studies evaluating the effect of simethicone as an adjunct to SBCE bowel preparation were included. The random-effects model was applied to calculate the risk estimates. Primary outcomes include the degree of gas bubbles and small bowel visualization quality (SBVQ). Secondary outcomes include diagnostic yield (DY), gastric transit time (GTT), small bowel transit time (SBTT), and completion rate (CR). RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included (8 RCTs, 1 prospective, and 1 retrospective study). Compared with the control group, the simethicone group showed significant improvements in the degree of gas bubbling (RR = 2.05, 95%CI:1.56-2.71, P < 0.001, I2 = 62%) and SBVQ (RR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.20-1.65, P < 0.001, I2 = 16%). Subgroup analysis showed that the SBVQ of simethicone group was better than fasting (RR = 2.62, 95% CI:1.49-4.59, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), mannitol (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.14-1.59, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%) and PEG group (RR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.06-1.65, P = 0.01, I2 = 0%). No significant associations were found for DY, GTT, SBTT, and CR. CONCLUSIONS: Simethicone for bowel preparation is useful to improve visualization and reduce the gas bubbling of SBCE.

Evaluation by a Machine Learning System of Two Preparations for Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy: The BUBS (Burst Unpleasant Bubbles with Simethicone) Study.

Background: Bubbles often mask the mucosa during capsule endoscopy (CE). Clinical scores assessing the cleanliness and the amount of bubbles in the small bowel (SB) are poorly reproducible unlike machine learning (ML) solutions. We aimed to measure the amount of bubbles with ML algorithms in SB CE recordings, and compare two polyethylene glycol (PEG)-based preparations, with and without simethicone, in patients with obscure gastro-intestinal bleeding (OGIB). Patients & Methods: All consecutive outpatients with OGIB from a tertiary care center received a PEG-based preparation, without or with simethicone, in two different periods. The primary outcome was a difference in the proportions (%) of frames with abundant bubbles (>10%) along the full-length video sequences between the two periods. SB CE recordings were analyzed by a validated computed algorithm based on a grey-level of co-occurrence matrix (GLCM), to assess the abundance of bubbles in each frame. Results: In total, 105 third generation SB CE recordings were analyzed (48 without simethicone and 57 with simethicone-added preparations). A significant association was shown between the use of a simethicone-added preparation and a lower abundance of bubbles along the SB (p = 0.04). A significantly lower proportion of "abundant in bubbles" frames was observed in the fourth quartile (30.5% vs. 20.6%, p = 0.02). There was no significant impact of the use of simethicone in terms of diagnostic yield, SB transit time and completion rate. Conclusion: An accurate and reproducible computed algorithm demonstrated significant decrease in the abundance of bubbles along SB CE recordings, with a marked effect in the last quartile, in patients for whom simethicone had been added in PEG-based preparations, compared to those without simethicone.