Bowel Preparation

Bowel preparation for pediatric colonoscopy.

The goal of this trial is to compare the outcomes of colostomy reversal with three days bowel preparation with no bowel preparation in terms of anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection and hospital stay. The important question this trial aims to answer is: 1\. is there any difference in outcomes after colostomy reversal with three days gut preparation pre-operatively vs no gut preparation? This prospective Randomized Controlled trial will include children with colostomy divided into two groups: Group A: No Mechanical Bowel Preparation Group B: 3 Days Mechanical Bowel Preparation Participants of Group A will be admitted 1 day prior to surgery date as they require no special preparation before surgery. They will be made Nil per oral 6 hours prior to surgery. Group B participants will be admitted 3 days prior to surgery. These participants will be restricted to fiber rich diet and milk 72 hours prior to surgery. They will be shifted to clear liquids 24 hours prior to surgery. Normal saline enema will be given 8 hourly through the stoma as well as per rectally by the trained person. Comparative outcomes will be: 1. Anastomotic leakage 2. Hospital Stay 3. Wound infection

Inadequate bowel preparation compromises colonoscopy quality and diagnostic accuracy, and cirrhosis is a recognized independent predictor of poor bowel cleansing. However, no bowel preparation regimen has been prospectively validated or specifically tailored for cirrhotic patients. This multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial will evaluate whether the addition of adjunctive measures as an intensified bowel preparation protocol improves bowel cleansing quality in adult patients with cirrhosis undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either a standard bowel preparation protocol, consisting of a 2-litre split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) regimen combined with a one-day low-residue diet and clear liquids the afternoon before the procedure (control), or the same split-dose regimen with the assigned adjunctive measures: 15 mg bisacodyl, a 3-day low-residue diet, and clear liquids the day before colonoscopy (intervention). The primary outcome is the proportion of patients achieving adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) total score ≥6 with no individual segment score \<2. Secondary outcomes include polyp, adenoma, advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer detection rates, caecal intubation rate, patient compliance, tolerability, and adverse events. Pre-specified subgroup analyses will evaluate the influence of etiology and severity of cirrhosis and portal hypertension complications. By addressing a critical and unmet clinical need, this trial aims to generate high-quality evidence to optimize bowel preparation strategies in patients with cirrhosis, improve colonoscopy quality, and ultimately enhance colorectal cancer screening outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Adequate bowel preparation is critical for successful colonoscopy, yet inadequate preparation remains a significant clinical challenge, occurring in 20-30% of procedures. In hospitalized patients undergoing therapeutic colonoscopy, suboptimal preparation leads to increased costs, prolonged hospital stay, and potential procedure cancellation or rescheduling. Current standard care involves resident ward rounds twice daily. This cluster-randomized crossover trial aims to evaluate whether increasing the frequency of structured resident ward rounds from 2 to 4 times per day can improve bowel preparation quality in hospitalized patients scheduled for therapeutic colonoscopy. The enhanced ward round intervention includes standardized checklist review, medication verification, dietary compliance confirmation, adverse event screening, and timely intervention when needed. Three hospital wards will be randomly assigned to different sequences of intervention and control periods using a crossover design with washout periods. The primary outcome is adequate bowel preparation quality assessed by Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS ≥6 with each segment ≥2), evaluated by blinded endoscopists. Secondary outcomes include procedure quality metrics (cecal intubation rate, examination duration), safety endpoints (electrolyte disturbances, aspiration events), health economics measures (length of stay, total costs), and healthcare worker burden (nursing workload, night-time call frequency). Subgroup analyses will examine intervention effects across age groups, cognitive function levels, prior colonoscopy experience, and comorbidity burden to identify populations most likely to benefit from enhanced monitoring. This pragmatic trial addresses a clinically relevant question using a real-world implementation strategy designed to minimize workflow disruption. Results will inform evidence-based policies regarding optimal ward round frequency for colonoscopy preparation in hospital settings.

This study is being conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of MSP01-T, a new bowel cleansing agent, in adults who are scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either MSP01-T or a comparator product. The study will assess how effectively MSP01-T cleans the bowel before the procedure and monitor any potential side effects. Adults aged 19 years and older who are planning to have a colonoscopy may be eligible to take part.

The objective of this randomized clinical trial is to compare prucalopride versus bisacodyl as a stimulant agent for bowel cleansing preparation prior to colonoscopy in patients undergoing the procedure at the Endoscopy Unit of the Hospital de Clínicas. The main research questions this study aims to answer are: Is prucalopride superior or equivalent to bisacodyl as a stimulant agent for bowel cleansing preparation before colonoscopy? Is the tolerability of prucalopride better, equivalent, or worse compared to bisacodyl? The investigators will compare the standard bowel cleansing preparation using polyethylene glycol (PEG) in combination with either bisacodyl or prucalopride as the stimulant agent. Participants will be randomized into two groups, both receiving the same base preparation with different stimulant agents.

Colonoscopy Preparation: Comparing Sennoside A+B and PM/Ca Colonoscopy is a test used to examine the inside of the bowel. Proper bowel preparation is crucial because it helps doctors get a clear view during the procedure. What is Sennoside A+B? Sennoside A+B is a type of laxative made from the senna plant. It works by stimulating the bowel to move and reducing the absorption of water, making it easier to pass stools. Research has shown that high doses of sennoside A+B can be effective for bowel preparation. Sennoside A+B vs. PEG: Some studies have found that sennoside A+B is more effective than PEG, another laxative, but can cause more abdominal pain. Other studies have found no significant difference in effectiveness between the two. What is Picosulfate/Magnesium Oxide/Citric Acid (PM/Ca)? PM/Ca is a combination of sodium picosulfate, magnesium oxide, and citric acid. Sodium picosulfate stimulates bowel movements, while magnesium oxide and citric acid help increase water in the bowel, making it easier to pass stools. PM/Ca vs. PEG: Research has shown that PM/Ca is as effective as PEG for bowel preparation. Patients using PM/Ca generally tolerate the preparation process better than those using PEG. Conclusion: While PEG is the preferred option according to guidelines, its high cost can make it less accessible in some places. In this study, we aim to compare the effectiveness and patient tolerance of Sennoside A+B and PM/Ca since no direct comparison between these two preparations has been made before.