This document is an update to the 2014 recommendations for optimizing the adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, which represents the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The US Multi-Society Task Force developed consensus statements and key clinical concepts addressing important aspects of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. The majority of consensus statements focus on individuals at average risk for inadequate bowel preparation. However, statements addressing individuals at risk for inadequate bowel preparation quality are also provided. The quality of a bowel preparation is defined as adequate when standard screening or surveillance intervals can be assigned based on the findings of the colonoscopy. We recommend the use of a split-dose bowel preparation regimen and suggest that a 2 L regimen may be sufficient. A same-day regimen is recommended as an acceptable alternative for individuals undergoing afternoon colonoscopy, but we suggest that a same-day regimen is an inferior alternative for individuals undergoing morning colonoscopy. We recommend limiting dietary restrictions to the day before a colonoscopy, relying on either clear liquids or low-fiber/low-residue diets for the early and midday meals. We suggest the adjunctive use of oral simethicone for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. Routine tracking of the rate of adequate bowel preparations at the level of individual endoscopists and at the level of the endoscopy unit is also recommended, with a target of >90% for both rates.

To assess the effectiveness and safety of auricular acupressure in reducing the incidence of adverse reactions(ADRs) during the bowel preparation.

This was a prospective, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial implemented at Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine. Between October 2022 and February 2023, 190 hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group received auricular acupressure during bowel preparation, whereas the control group received no additional treatment. Analyses were conducted using the intention-to-treat method. Intervention effects were evaluated by comparing outcomes between the two groups.

The overall incidence of ADRs to bowel preparation in the intervention group (37/95 = 37.89 %) was lower than that in the control group (59/95 = 62.11 %, P < 0.05). Compared with control group, the incidence of nausea in the intervention group decreased by 15.79 %(95%CI 0.03-0.19, P = 0.018), whereas no significant difference was observed in the incidence of abdominal distension(P > 0.05). Regarding the comparison of the severity of the ADRs, the overall score of ADRs and the scores for nausea and abdominal distension in the intervention group were statistically lower than those in the control group (all P < 0.05). No auricular acupressure-related adverse effect was observed.

Auricular acupressure can significantly decrease the incidence of ADRs to colonoscopic bowel preparation in patients and alleviate the severity of nausea and bloating symptoms, which is a safe, simple, and effective method.

ChiCTR, no. ChiCTR2200061742; Registered July 2, 2022. URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojEN.html?proj=167796.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer in Brazil, despite the availability of screening methods that reduce its risk. Colonoscopy is the only screening method that also allows therapeutic procedures. The proper screening through colonoscopy is linked to the quality of the exam, which can be evaluated according to quality criteria recommended by various institutions. Among the factors, the most used is the Adenoma Detection Rate, which should be at least 25% for general population.

To evaluate the quality of the screening colonoscopies performed in a quarternary private Brazilian hospital.

This is a retrospective study evaluating the quality indicators of colonoscopies performed at a private center since its inauguration. Only asymptomatic patients aged over 45 years who underwent screening colonoscopy were included. The primary outcome was the Adenoma Detection Rate, and secondary outcomes included polyps detection rate and safety profile. Subanalyses evaluated the correlation of endoscopic findings with gender and age and the evolution of detection rates over the years.

A total of 2,144 patients were include with a mean age of 60.54 years-old. Polyps were diagnosed in 68.6% of the procedures. Adenoma detection rate was 46.8%, with an increasing rate over the years, mainly in males. A low rate of adverse events was reported in 0.23% of the cases, with no need for surgical intervention and no deaths.

This study shows that high quality screening colonoscopy is possible when performed by experienced endoscopists and trained nurses, under an adequate infrastructure.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), defined according to the Rome IV diagnostic criteria, is a chronic functional gastrointestinal disorder characterized by recurrent abdominal pain related to altered bowel habits. First-line recommended treatments are limited to combining drugs targeting predominant symptoms, particularly pain (antispasmodics), constipation (laxatives), and diarrhea (loperamide), yielding only a limited therapeutic gain. GASTRAP® DIRECT is a class IIa medical formulation composed of a combination of chitin-glucan and simethicone indicated for the symptomatic treatment of gas-related gastrointestinal disorders by combining different mechanisms of action.

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 4-week GASTRAP® DIRECT treatment in patients with IBS.

In this prospective, multicenter, open-label trial, 120 patients with IBS received three sticks of GASTRAP® DIRECT (1.5 g/d of chitin-glucan and 0.75 mg/d of simethicone) per day for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the responder rate, defined as the number of patients whose abdominal pain score decreased by ≥ 30% from baseline to week (W) 4. The analysis was performed using the per-protocol set. Cardinal symptoms, impact of global symptoms on daily life, change in stool consistency, and improvement in defecatory disorders were evaluated.

Overall, 100 patients were evaluated. At W4, 67% (95%CI: 57-75) showed improvement in abdominal pain (score: 5.8 ± 2.4 vs 2.9 ± 2.0, P < 0.0001). Similar improvements were observed for bloating [8.0 ± 1.7 vs 4.7 ± 2.9, P < 0.0001; 60% (95%CI: 50-70) responders], abdominal distension [7.2 ± 2.1 vs 4.4 ± 3.1, P < 0.0001; 53% (95%CI: 43-63) responders], and impact of global symptoms on daily life [7.1 ± 2.0 vs 4.6 ± 2.9, P < 0.0001; 54% (95%CI: 44-64) responders]. Stool consistency improved in most patients (90% and 57% for patients with liquid and hard stools, respectively). Overall, 42% of patients with defecatory disorders reported very much/considerable improvements by W2. No severe adverse event occurred, and tolerability was rated "good" or "very good" by 93% of patients.

GASTRAP® DIRECT is safe and well tolerated, alleviating IBS symptoms rapidly in 2 weeks. This open-label study suggests that the combination of chitin-glucan and simethicone could be beneficial in patients with IBS.

Sedated colonoscopy has been increasingly selected. However, the effect of sedated colonoscopy on polyp/adenoma detection rate (PDR/ADR) remains controversial among studies.

In this retrospective study, the medical records of 11 504 consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy at our department from July 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022 were collected. Patients were divided into sedated and unsedated groups according to the use of intravenous sedation during colonoscopy. Overall PDR/ADR, right-side, transverse, and left-side colon PDR/ADR, and single and multiple PDR/ADR were calculated. By adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, inpatient, screening/surveillance, cecal intubation time, colonoscopy withdrawal time ≥6 min, and an endoscopist's experience ≥5 years, multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association of sedated colonoscopy with overall PDR/ADR, right-side, transverse, and left-side colon PDR/ADR, and single and multiple PDR/ADR, where the absence of PDR/ADR was used as reference. Odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Overall, 2275 patients were included, of whom 293 and 1982 underwent sedated and unsedated colonoscopy, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that sedated colonoscopy was independently associated with lower overall PDR/ADR (OR = 0.640, 95% CI = 0.460-0.889, P = 0.008), right-side colon PDR/ADR (OR = 0.591, 95% CI = 0.417-0.837, P = 0.003), single PDR/ADR (OR = 0.659, 95% CI = 0.436-0.996, P = 0.048), and multiple PDR/ADR (OR = 0.586, 95% CI = 0.402-0.855, P = 0.005), but not transverse or left-side colon PDR/ADR.

Sedated colonoscopy may not be beneficial in terms of overall PDR/ADR, right-side colon PDR/ADR, and number of polyps/adenomas. Thus, it should be selectively recommended. Additionally, it should be necessary to explore how to improve the quality of sedated colonoscopy.

Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) of polyp histology could support endoscopists in clinical decision-making. However, this has not been validated in a real-world setting.

We performed a prospective, multicenter study comparing CADx and endoscopist predictions of polyp histology in real-time colonoscopy. Optical diagnosis based on visual inspection of polyps was made by experienced endoscopists. After this, the automated output from the CADx support tool was recorded. All imaged polyps were resected for histological assessment. Primary outcome was difference in diagnostic performance between CADx and endoscopist prediction of polyp histology. Subgroup analysis was performed for polyp size, bowel preparation, difficulty of location of the polyps, and endoscopist experience.

A total of 661 eligible polyps were resected in 320 patients aged ≥40 years between March 2021 and July 2022. CADx had an overall accuracy of 71.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.0-75.0), compared with 75.2% (95% CI 71.7-78.4) for endoscopists ( P = 0.023). The sensitivity of CADx for neoplastic polyps was 61.8% (95% CI 56.9-66.5), compared with 70.3% (95% CI 65.7-74.7) for endoscopists ( P < 0.001). The interobserver agreement between CADx and endoscopist predictions of polyp histology was moderate (83.1% agreement, κ 0.661). When there was concordance between CADx and endoscopist predictions, the accuracy increased to 78.1%.

The overall diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for neoplastic polyps was higher in experienced endoscopists compared with CADx predictions, with moderate interobserver agreement. Concordance in predictions increased this diagnostic accuracy. Further research is required to improve the performance of CADx and to establish its role in clinical practice.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The quality of bowel preparation is an important factor in the success of colonoscopy. However, the quality of bowel preparation is often affected by multiple factors. The main objective of this study was to explore the specific factors that affect the quality of bowel preparation.

Patients were consecutively recruited from the gastroenterology department in Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan from May 2018 to December 2018. All patients were undergoing colonoscopy. Bowel preparation was evaluated by the Ottawa Bowel preparation Scale (OBPS) and all patients were categorized into 2 groups according to the OBPS. Multivariate analysis was conducted to identify the factors associated with bowel preparation quality.

A total of 910 patients were included in the analysis with an average age of 48.62 ± 13.57 years. Patient source (P < 0.001) and the preparation method (P = 0.029) were correlated with OBPS adequacy. In addition, after stratified by age, preparation method (P = 0.022) was a significant factor among patients under 50 years old; whereas waiting time (P = 0.005) was a significant factor among patients over 50 years old.

Bowel preparation should be tailored based on the age of the patients to determine the most appropriate plan, including the most appropriate waiting time and the most appropriate purgative combination. Doctors should also focus more on the quality of bowel preparation in inpatients, who are more likely than outpatients to have an inadequate bowel preparation.