Superior bowel preparation quality for colonoscopy with 1L-PEG compared to 2L-PEG and picosulphate: Data from a large real-world retrospective outpatient cohort.

Laura Rovedatti, Simona Agazzi, Erica Fazzino, Andrea Anderloni, Federico Biagi, Annalisa Schiepatti, Antonio Di Sabatino, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Eleonora Alimenti, Aurelio Mauro, Stefano Mazza, Stiliano Maimaris, Elena Strada, Lodovica Pozzi, Marco Bardone, Davide Scalvini, Francesca Lusetti

Journal: Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver 2024;56(11):1906-1913

PMID: 38729902

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several randomized clinical trials comparing different bowel preparations (BP) have shown similar efficacy; however, there is a lack of real-world studies on this topic.

AIMS

This study aims to identify the most effective BP regimen in a real-world setting and any predictors of inadequate BP.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study was conducted over 14 months at an academic hospital including outpatient colonoscopies in which adult patients did not teach on how to perform BP before colonoscopy. Colonoscopies with 1L-PEG, 2L-PEG and picosulphate mixtures were considered. A multivariable analysis for factors associated to poor BP was fitted.

RESULTS

Overall, 1779 patients (51 %F, 60±14) years were included. The 1L-PEG regimen provided a higher rate of BP adequacy at multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 2.30, 95 %CI 1.67-3.16,p < 0.001) and was associated with higher median Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score (p < 0.001), higher rate of right-colon cleansing (p < 0.001) and exam completion (p = 0.04). Furthermore, we identified male sex, history of constipation, active smoking, previous pelvic surgery, concomitant psychiatric/neurological or chronic kidney diseases as predictors of inadequate BP.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest real-world study comparing 1L-PEG to other BP regimens. Our results suggest 1L-PEG provides better BP in a non-controlled setting, improving clinical practice quality and minimizing the need for repeated colonoscopies and saving healthcare resources.

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Address: Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy unit, IRCCS San Matteo Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy; University of Pavia, PhD in Experimental Medicine, Pavia, Italy. Electronic address: [email protected].; Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; First Department of Internal Medicine, IRCCS San Matteo Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy.; Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.; Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy unit, IRCCS San Matteo Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy.; Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy unit, IRCCS San Matteo Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy.

Link outs

Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.