Effectiveness and safety of 1-L PEG-ASC versus other bowel preparations for colonoscopy: A meta-analysis of nine randomized clinical trials.
ADR
Bowel preparation
Colonoscopy
PEG-ASC
Polyethylene glycol
Safety
Journal
Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver
ISSN: 1878-3562
Titre abrégé: Dig Liver Dis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 100958385
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
received:
31
08
2022
revised:
30
10
2022
accepted:
08
11
2022
medline:
28
7
2023
pubmed:
6
12
2022
entrez:
5
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (PEG-ASC) preparation has been recently developed to improve patients' experience in colonoscopy. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of 1-L PEG-ASC compared with those of other bowel preparations for colonoscopy. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing 1-L PEG-ASC with other bowel preparations published through July 2022. A random-effects model was applied for pooling the results; heterogeneity was expressed as I Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. The analysis showed significantly higher cleansing success (CS) (OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.25-1.81; p < 0.01, I Compared to other preparations, 1-L PEG-ASC yielded higher overall CS, higher right-colon HQC rates, and similar ADR. The number of patients with AEs and incidence of the total AEs were significantly higher with 1-L PEG-ASC in the absence of serious AEs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
A 1-L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (PEG-ASC) preparation has been recently developed to improve patients' experience in colonoscopy. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of 1-L PEG-ASC compared with those of other bowel preparations for colonoscopy.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing 1-L PEG-ASC with other bowel preparations published through July 2022. A random-effects model was applied for pooling the results; heterogeneity was expressed as I
RESULTS
Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. The analysis showed significantly higher cleansing success (CS) (OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.25-1.81; p < 0.01, I
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to other preparations, 1-L PEG-ASC yielded higher overall CS, higher right-colon HQC rates, and similar ADR. The number of patients with AEs and incidence of the total AEs were significantly higher with 1-L PEG-ASC in the absence of serious AEs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36470722
pii: S1590-8658(22)00788-5
doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2022.11.010
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cathartics
0
Laxatives
0
Polyethylene Glycols
3WJQ0SDW1A
Ascorbic Acid
PQ6CK8PD0R
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Meta-Analysis
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1010-1018Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest Marcello Maida served as advisory board member and received lecture grants from Norgine. Giovanni Marasco received consultation fees from AlfaSigma. Other authors have no proprietary, financial, professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of this manuscript.