Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

A Multi-centre Study Comparing the Polyp Detection Rate of Two Different Types of Bowel Preparation: a 2-litre Solution (MOVIPREP) Versus a Hyperosmotic and Stimulant Combined Low Volume Bowel Preparation (Sodium Picosulfate and Magnesium Citrate)

ABSTRACT: To compare the polyp and adenoma detection rate of MOVIPREP versus an oral Sodium Picosulfate/Magnesium Citrate solution.

DISEASE(S): Colorectal Cancer,Colorectal Neoplasms

PROVIDER: 2132271 | ecrin-mdr-crc |

REPOSITORIES: ECRIN MDR

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Pediatric bowel preparation: Sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, citric acid <i>vs</i> polyethylene glycol, a randomized trial.

Project description:BackgroundBowel preparation in children can be challenging.AimTo describe the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, and citric acid (SPMC) bowel preparation in children.MethodsPhase 3, randomized, assessor-blinded, multicenter study of low-volume, divided dose SPMC enrolled children 9-16 years undergoing elective colonoscopy. Participants 9-12 years were randomized 1:1:1 to SPMC ½ dose × 2, SPMC 1 dose × 2, or polyethylene glycol (PEG). Participants 13-16 years were randomized 1:1 to SPMC 1 dose × 2 or PEG. PEG-based bowel preparations were administered per local protocol. Primary efficacy endpoint for quality of bowel preparation was responders (rating of 'excellent' or 'good') by modified Aronchick Scale. Secondary efficacy endpoint was participant's tolerability and satisfaction from a 7-item questionnaire. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory evaluations.Results78 participants were randomized, 48 were 9-12 years, 30 were 13-16 years. For the primary efficacy endpoint in 9-12 years, 50.0%, 87.5%, and 81.3% were responders for SPMC ½ dose × 2, SPMC 1 dose × 2, and PEG groups, respectively. Responder rates for 13-16 years were 81.3% for SPMC 1 dose × 2 and 85.7% for PEG. Overall, 43.8% of participants receiving SPMC 1 dose × 2 reported it was 'very easy' or 'easy' to drink, compared with 20.0% receiving PEG. Treatment-emergent AEs were reported by 45.5% of participants receiving SPMC 1 dose × 2 and 63.0% receiving PEG.ConclusionSPMC was an efficacious and safe for bowel preparation in children 9-16 years, with comparable efficacy to PEG. Tolerability for SPMC was higher compared to PEG.

| S-EPMC7596638 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of Moviprep and Prepkit C Bowel preparation in inflammatory bowel disease patients and in the general population

Project description:Interventions: Randomised to two different types of bowel prep: Moviprep or Prep Kit C All patients were provided with the bowel preparation kits and written information explaining appropriate diet changes, instructions on how to prepare and timing of consumption. This information was additionally explained at a face-to-face review in the outpatient clinic up to four weeks before the colonoscopy by either a senior gastroenterologist or a gastroenterology advanced trainee. Arm 1: Moviprep Moviprep comes with two large sachets (sachet A) and two small sachets (sachet B). Each pair of sachets (A and B) is dissolved in one litre of water to make a solution. One litre is taken the evening before the procedure and the other in the early morning on the day of of the colonoscopy. Primary outcome(s): Bowel preparation tolerability as determined by a Tolerability Questionnaire [On day of completion of bowel preparation ] Study Design: Purpose: Diagnosis; Allocation: Randomised controlled trial; Masking: Blinded (masking used);Assignment: Parallel;Type of endpoint: Safety/efficacy

| 2469860 | ecrin-mdr-crc

Trial Comparing Moviprep and Phosphoral as Bowel Prep Before Colonoscopy

Project description:Using Moviprep patients use shorter time to do a bowel prep before colonoscopy. No major single center has docuemted the advantage of using moviprep as bowel prep before colonoscopy.This randomised study was conducted to compare moviprep with the present standard: Phosphoral to investigate the degree of bowel cleasing before colonoscopy in patients suspected of colorectal cancer, and to investigate number of days where patients need to stay home.

| 2119331 | ecrin-mdr-crc

A Randomized Prospective Trial Comparing Polyethylene Glycol and Sodium Picosulphate With Magnesium Citrate

Project description:Adequate bowel cleansing is important for a completeness of colonoscopy and detection of colon polyps. Inadequate bowel preparation leads to longer duration of colonoscopy and obscured mucosal visualization resulting in missed lesions. Bowel cleansing agents are simply classified into the large volume, iso-osmotic polyethylene glycol (PEG) based solutions or the small volume osmotically active agents, such as sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate (SPMC). There are rare reports that compare directly conventional polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution and sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate (SPMC) for bowel preparation in korea. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of different regimens of SPMC and PEG solution.

| 2139045 | ecrin-mdr-crc

Polyethylene glycol vs sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate for colonoscopy preparation.

Project description:Background and study aimsPolyethylene glycol-based electrolyte solutions (PEG-ELS) and the combination of sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate (SPMC) are commonly used bowel preparation agents. The aim of the present study was to compare the two agents with regard to cleansing efficacy and tolerance among individuals scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy.Materials and methodsThe 368 colonoscopy outpatients at three Norwegian hospitals were randomized to bowel lavage with either PEG-ELS or SPMC. Compliance and patient tolerance were evaluated using a patient questionnaire. Bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPS), a validated scoring system with scores between 0 (best) and 14.ResultsThere was no difference in the cleansing quality between the PEG-ELS and SPMC groups (median OBPS 5.0 in both groups). The group that received SPMC reported better overall patient tolerance than the PEG-ELS group (72.6 % vs 59.0 % reporting no or slight discomfort, P < 0.01). Compliance with the recommended total fluid intake (4 L) was better in the SPMC group than in the PEG-ELS group (94.2 % vs 81.2 % respectively, P < 0.01); moreover, the polyp detection rate was superior (34.3 % vs 23.3 %, P = 0.02).ConclusionPEG-ELS and SPMC are equally effective in cleansing efficacy, but SPMC was better tolerated by patients and resulted in superior patient compliance and polyp detection rate.Clinical trial registrationNCT01624454.

| S-EPMC4423298 | biostudies-literature

Mechanical bowel preparation in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Project description:Interventions: (A) arm Moviprep 1) Take Moviprep at 1 L/hour orally 2) Take 0.5L of water after intake of 1L of Moviprep (Stop taking Moviprep if feces become clear) 3) In case of unclear feces after intake of 1L of Moviprep, continue to take Moviprep and water until clear feces evacuation 4) Maximum dose of Moviprep is 2 L (B) arm Niflec 1) Take Niflec at 1 L/hour orally 2) Stop taking Niflec if feces become clear 3) Maximum dose of Niflec is 2 L Primary outcome(s): Availability of bowel irrigation effect Study Design: randomized controlled trial, single blind, active control, parallel assignment, treatment purpose

| 2613763 | ecrin-mdr-crc

A Genetic Selection for Mycobacterium smegmatis Mutants Tolerant to Killing by Sodium Citrate Defines a Combined Role for Magnesium Homeostasis and Osmotic Stress in Cell Death

Project description:Regulation of Mycobacterium smegmatis gene expression by treatment with sodium citrate.

2023-09-06 | GSE180696 | GEO

A Randomized Controlled Trial compares the efficacy of Moviprep vs Muben on the bowel preparation of the patients who undergo colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection

Project description:Interventions: Moviprep 1.5L ~ 2L Muben 3L ~ 4L Primary outcome(s): Preparation time Study Design: Parallel Randomized

| 2630005 | ecrin-mdr-crc

A Randomized Prospective Trial Comparing Low-volume Bowel Preparation Methods

Project description:Colonoscopy is a common screening method to detect polyps and CRC. With the early detection of CRC through screening colonoscopy, patients could have better therapeutic effects and outcomes. In population screening programs, an increase in completed colonoscopies is related to a decrease in mortality from CRC. However, the miss rate for detecting colorectal neoplastic polyps of colonoscopy is 5-28%. The reluctance of participants to undergo bowel preparation results in the relatively low rate of detection of polyps and CRC, because poor preparation interferes with successful colon mucosa examination during a colonoscopy. Low-volume bowel preparations provide equivalent cleansing effect compared with standard 4 liter polyethylene glycol. However, studies comparing the superiority between low-volume bowel preparations are rare, and results are controversial. This study aimed to compare the bowel cleansing quality and tolerability between split-dose sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate and polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid.

| 2175161 | ecrin-mdr-crc

Improving quality of colonoscopy by adding simethicone to sodium phosphate bowel preparation.

Project description:AimTo evaluate the effectiveness of simethicone in enhancing visibility and efficacy during colonoscopy.MethodsA prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted. One hundred and twenty-four patients were allocated to receive 2 doses of sodium phosphate plus 240 mg of tablet simethicone or placebo as bowel preparation. Visibility was blindly assessed for the amount of air bubbles and adequacy of colon preparation. Total colonoscopic time, side effects of the medication, endoscopist and patient satisfaction were also compared.ResultsSodium phosphate plus simethicone, compared to sodium phosphate plus placebo, improved visibility by diminishing air bubbles (100.00% vs 42.37%, P < 0.0001) but simethicone failed to demonstrate improvement in adequacy of colon preparation (90.16% vs 81.36%, P = 0.17). Endoscopist and patient satisfaction were increased significantly in the simethicone group. However, there was no difference in the total duration of colonoscopy and side effects of the medication.ConclusionThe addition of simethicone is of benefit for colonoscopic bowel preparation by diminishing air bubbles, which results in enhanced visibility. Endoscopist and patient satisfaction is also increased.

| S-EPMC2702112 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data