Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Research Articles

Effectiveness of Mechanical Bowel Preparation Before Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery: a Randomized, Single-Blind, Controlled Trial.

The objective of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the effect of bowel preparation using only oral polyethylene glycol electrolyte (PEG) solution vs. oral polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution (PEG) combined with mechanical sodium phosphate (NaP) enema on the surgical field visualization in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic procedures. Participants were randomized to either a single oral PEG solution or an oral PEG solution combined by mechanical NaP enema. The intraoperative visualization of the surgical field, the ease of manipulation of the bowels and overall difficulty level of the surgery were evaluated by the surgeon using a self-administered questionnaire. After the surgery, the patients completed a survey assessing postoperative gastrointestinal discomfort. 114 women were enrolled and randomized to oral PEG solution only group (n=48), and oral PEG plus mechanical NaP enema group (n=66). 42 women in oral PEG only group and 59 oral PEG plus NaP enema group completed the study. There was no difference in intraoperative visualization, or overall difficulty of the operation between the two groups, and bowel manipulation was easier in the oral PEG only group. Also, there was no difference in operating time between the groups. The patients' level of gastrointestinal discomfort after the surgery was not significantly different between the two groups. Routine use of mechanical NaP enema before robot-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic surgery is not recommended, because it has no additional benefit regarding intraoperative visualization or the surgical level of difficulty over oral bowel preparation methods.

Comparative effectiveness of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution versus lactulose for treatment of hepatic encephalopathy: a single blind, randomised clinical trial

Comparative effectiveness of polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution versus lactulose for treatment of hepatic encephalopathy: a single blind, randomised clinical trial

Management of functional constipation-associated halitosis: a retrospective study.

The features of functional constipation (FC)-associated halitosis were identified in the author's previous report. In this report, the author aimed to further investigate its treatment and efficacy. This retrospective study reviewed 100 FC patients, including 82 (82%) halitosis patients and 18 (18%) non-halitosis patients. They underwent the organoleptic test (OLT) to diagnose halitosis, and the organoleptic score (OLS) (0-5) was used to evaluated halitosis severity. The Cleveland Clinical Constipation Score (CCCS) (0-30) was used to evaluate FC severity. Patients were treated with the laxative polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder (PGEP) for four weeks. These tests were performed before and after treatment. The author found that, before treatment, the CCCS was 20.00 (18.00-23.00) for all patients, 21.00 (19.00-24.00) for halitosis patients, and 18.00 (17.00-18.25) for non-halitosis patients. A significant difference was observed between halitosis patients and non-halitosis patients (P < 0.001). The OLS for halitosis patients was 3.00 (3.00-4.00). A positive correlation (r = 0.814, 95% CI: 0.732-0.872, P < 0.001) was found between OLS and CCCS. A CCCS ≥18 predicted over 50% probability of halitosis. After treatment, the CCCS significantly decreased to 11.50 (6.00-14.75) (P < 0.001), and OLS significantly decreased to 1.00 (0.00-2.00) (P < 0.001). A positive correlation (r = 0.770, 95% CI: 0.673-0.841, P < 0.001) persisted between OLS and CCCS. A pre-treatment CCCS ≥21 predicted over 50% probability of post-treatment halitosis, while a post-treatment CCCS ≥12 predicted over 50% probability of post-treatment halitosis. The author concludes that the severity of FC parallels the severity of FC-associated halitosis, and can predict the probability of halitosis. Laxative treatment with PGEP is effective in improving FC-associated halitosis.

Efficacy of Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder Combined With Linaclotide for Colon Cleansing in Patients With Chronic Constipation Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Multicenter, Single-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Constipation is an independent risk factor for poor bowel preparation. This study aimed to evaluate the bowel cleansing efficacy and safety of polyethylene glycol (PEG) combined with linaclotide (lin) for colonoscopy in patients with chronic constipation (CC). This single-blinded, randomized, controlled, and multicenter study was conducted from July 2021 to December 2022 at 7 hospitals. Patients with CC who underwent colonoscopies were enrolled and randomly assigned to 4 groups with split-PEG regimens: 4L-PEG group, 4L-PEG+1d-Lin group, 3L-PEG+1d-Lin group, and 3L-PEG+3d-Lin group. The primary outcome was rates of adequate bowel preparation, defined as a total BBPS score ≥6 and a score ≥2 for each segment. Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, sleep quality, willingness to repeat the colonoscopy, adenoma detection rate, and polyp detection rate. Five hundred two patients were enrolled. The rates of adequate bowel preparation (80.0% vs 60.3%, P < 0.001; 84.4% vs 60.3%, P < 0.001) and the total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) scores (6.90 ± 1.28 vs 6.00 ± 1.61, P < 0.001; 7.03 ± 1.24 vs 6.00 ± 1.61, P < 0.01) in the 4L-PEG+1d-Lin group and the 3L-PEG+3d-Lin group were superior to that in the 4L-PEG group. Compared with the 4L-PEG group, the 4L-PEG+1d-Lin group (66.7% vs 81.7%, P = 0.008) and the 3L-PEG+3d-Lin group (75.0% vs 81.7%, P = 0.224) had a lower percentage of mild adverse events. No statistically significant difference in willingness to repeat the colonoscopy, sleep quality, polyp detection rate, or adenoma detection rate was observed among groups. PEG combined with linaclotide might be an effective method for bowel preparation before colonoscopy in patients with CC.

Improving Zn anode electrochemical reversibility via crystallographic plane regulation by polyethylene glycol electrolyte additive

Improving Zn anode electrochemical reversibility via crystallographic plane regulation by polyethylene glycol electrolyte additive

The Effects of Combined Use of Linaclotide and Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder in Colonoscopy Preparation for Patients With Chronic Constipation.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of linaclotide and polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolyte powder in patients with chronic constipation undergoing colonoscopy preparation. We included 260 patients with chronic constipation who were scheduled to undergo a colonoscopy. They were equally divided into 4 groups using a random number table: 4L PEG, 3L PEG, 3L PEG+L, and 2L PEG+L. The 4 groups were compared based on their scores on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Ottawa Bowel Preparation Quality Scale (OBPQS), adverse reactions during the bowel preparation procedure, colonoscope insertion time, colonoscope withdrawal time, detection rate of adenomas, and their willingness to repeat bowel preparation. In terms of the score of the right half of the colon, the score of the transverse colon, the total score using BBPS, and the total score using OBPQS, the 3L PEG (polyethylene glycol)+L group was superior to groups 3L PEG and 2L PEG+L (P<0.05), but comparable to the 4L PEG group (P>0.05). The incidence rate of vomiting was higher in the 4L PEG group than in the 2L PEG+L group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the insertion time of the colonoscope between the 4 groups. The colonoscope withdrawal time in the 3L PEG+L group was shorter than in groups 4L PEG and 3L PEG (P<0.05) and comparable to that in the 4L PEG group (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of adenoma detection among the 4 groups (P>0.05). The 4L PEG group was the least willing of the 4 groups to undergo repeated bowel preparation (P<0.05). The 3L PEG+L is optimal among the 4 procedures. It can facilitate high-quality bowel preparation, reduce the incidence of nausea during the bowel preparation procedure, and encourage patients to undertake repeated bowel preparation.

Retracted: Effect of Compound Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder on the Quality of Gastrobowel Preparation before Enteroscopy Intervention.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.1155/2022/9895499.].

Preoperative bowel preparation promotes intestinal functional recovery after esophagectomy.

Patients are prone to intestinal dysfunction after esophagectomy. The value of preoperative bowel preparation before esophagectomy is controversial. There is a lack of evidence as to whether preoperative bowel preparation can help patients improve bowel function and shorten the recovery time of bowel function. The objectives of this study were to explore whether preoperative bowel preparation can promote the recovery of intestinal function after esophagectomy. We analysed 139 patients who underwent elective radical esophagectomy in the Department of Thoracic Surgery at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from May 2016 to December 2018. The enrolled patients were divided into the study group (bowel preparation group) and the control group (no bowel preparation group) of 71 cases and 68 cases. Patients in the study group were given dissolved polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder and a cleansing enema the day before surgery. Patients in the control group were neither given polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder nor cleansing enemas before surgery. The postoperative recovery of the two groups were compared. Postoperative bed rest time, bowel function recovery time and the time of first flatus and defecation after surgery were significantly shorter in patients with bowel preparation than in those without bowel preparation, and the differences were statistically significant. (P=0.038, P<0.001, P<0.001, P<0.001; respectively). Preoperative bowel preparation can promote the recovery of patients with esophageal cancer, especially the recovery of bowel function, which can reduce the pain caused by abdominal distension and improve the quality of life of patients.

Lubiprostone plus polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution (PEG-ELS) versus PEG-ELS for bowel preparation in chronic constipation: a randomized controlled trial

Colonoscopy is considered the standard procedure for early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer. Adequate bowel cleansing is an important determinant of the efficacy of colonoscopy screening. Currently, there is no standard method of bowel preparation for patients with chronic constipation. The aim was to access the rate of adequate bowel cleansing achieved using split-dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution (PEG-ELS) plus lubiprostone in comparison with split-dose PEG-ELS alone. A single-centre, endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Seventy-eight constipated patients aged 18–75 years who were indicated for colonoscopy in the gastroenterology unit of Srinagarind Hospital, Khon Kaen University, between February 2020 and February 2021 were randomly allocated to receive either split-dose PEG-ELS in combination with lubiprostone (N = 39) or split-dose PEG-ELS alone (N = 39) before colonoscopy. Adequate bowel cleansing was defined as an Ottawa bowel preparation score ≤ 7. The rate of adequate bowel cleansing was comparable between the PEG-ELS plus lubiprostone group and the PEG-ELS alone group (50% vs. 52.9%, p value = 0.81) with a relative risk of 1.13 (95% CI = 0.43–2.91). There were no significant differences in adenoma detection rate (41.2% vs. 35.3%, p value = 0.62), adverse events, acceptance, compliance, or patient satisfaction between the 2 groups. No additional benefit to successful bowel preparation was achieved by the combination of lubiprostone and PEG-ELS in chronic constipation patients undergoing colonoscopy.

Bowel preparation efficacy and safety of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder combined with linaclotide for colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

Adequate bowel preparation is essential for colonoscopy, which is important for detecting colon polyps and preventing colorectal cancer. Linaclotide is approved for irritable bowel syndrome with predominant constipation (IBS-C) symptoms. The main objective of this study was to explore the quality of bowel preparation by low-volume compound polyethylene glycol (PEG) combined with linaclotide. A total of 266 patients who underwent colonoscopy in Shangrao People's Hospital from June 2021 to June 2022 were randomized to 1 of 3 split PEG regimens: 4LPEG, 2LPEG, and 2LPEG + L (linaclotide). The primary end point was adequate bowel preparation (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] total score of ≥6, with each of three colonic segments subscores ≥2). Secondary outcomes were polyp detection rates and the incidence of adverse reactions. Over 12 months, 266 subjects were randomized into 2LPEG (n = 12), 4LPEG (n = 112), or 2LPEG + L (n = 142). There were no significant differences between the 4LPEG and 2LPEG + L groups in achieving adequate bowel preparation (P > 0.05). The mean BBPS score of the total colon, left hemi-colon, right hemi-colon, and transverse in the 2LPEG + L group was higher than that in the 2LPEG group (P < 0.001). Patient's sleeping quality and the incidence of adverse reactions of 2LPEG + L group were compatible with 2LPEG group, but it was significantly lower than that in 4LPEG group. There was no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of colon polyps between each group. The quality of bowel preparation of the compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder combined with linaclotide is approximately the same as that of 4LPEG, and it can reduce the adverse reactions in the process of bowel preparation, and its intestinal cleansing effect is also better than that of 2LPEG.

Novel Colon Preparation Method Combining Bowel Cleanser Reduction and Unique Walking.

Poor bowel preparation increases the difficulty of colonoscopy and affects lesion detection. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of a new bowel preparation method using polyethylene glycol electrolyte formulation containing ascorbic acid (PEG plus ascorbic acid: PEG-Asc, MOVIPREP) to improve bowel cleansing and shorten preparation time. This was a single-center, retrospective study. In the new method, patients were instructed to take a laxative the day before the examination and PEG1L on the day of the examination. In addition, we instructed the patients to walk, which we designed. The primary endpoints were the degree of bowel cleansing (assessed by the Boston bowel preparation scale, BBPS) and time to the cecum. The conventional group reached the cecum in 606.5±225.8 seconds (mean±SD), whereas the introduced group reached the cecum in 500±217.1 seconds, a significantly shorter time (P<0.05). In the BBPS, the score in the introduced group was significantly higher (P<0.01): 6.8±2.14 points in the conventional group and 8.6±0.74 points in the introduction group. Pretreatment combining the 1L weight loss method and walking improves bowel cleansing and shortens the time to reach the cecum.

Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundColonoscopy is the standard and most effective screening tool for colonic diseases and the accuracy of colonoscopy depends on the quality of bowel preparation. The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy.MethodsIn this retrospective study, patients who underwent colonoscopy in 2018 and received 3 L of Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes powder were included. They were instructed to drink 1.5 L the night before the colonoscopy and 1.5 L 4–6 h before the procedure given in doses of 250 ml every 10 min with 30 ml of simethicone given 4–6 h before the colonoscopy. Patient- and procedure-related parameters were recorded. An adequate bowel preparation was defined as all 3 segments rated 2 or 3 on the Boston Bowel Preparation scale. Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsA total of 6720 patients were included in the present study. The mean age of these patients was 49.7 ± 13.0 years old. Inadequate bowel preparation was found in 233 (12.4%), 139 (6.4%), 131 (7%), 68 (8.6%) patients in spring, summer, autumn and winter respectively. On the multivariate analysis, male gender (OR: 1.295; 95% CI: 1.088–1.542; P = 0.005), inpatient status (OR: 1.377; 95% CI: 1.040–1.822; P = 0.025) and season (spring vs. winter, OR: 1.514; 95% CI: 1.139–2.012; P = 0.004) were the independent risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation.ConclusionsMale gender, inpatient status and spring season were the independent risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation. For patients with risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation, enhanced bowel preparation and instructions may help to optimize the quality of bowel preparation.

Whole Bowel Irrigation should not be used routinely in poisoned patients.

Whole bowel irrigation is a method of gastric decontamination in the poisoned patient involving administration of large volumes of osmotically balanced polyethylene glycol-electrolyte solution to empty the gastrointestinal tract of ingested toxins before absorption, limiting systemic toxicity. While this approach may seem intuitive, and observational studies confirm it can lead to expulsion of tablets or packets in the rectal effluent, there is a lack of evidence correlating this with improved patient outcomes. Administration of whole bowel irrigation is also challenging to the inexperience physician and associated with adverse effects, which may be serious. Recommendations for the consideration of whole bowel irrigation are therefore limited to patients who have ingested modified release preparations, those of have ingested pharmaceuticals not adsorbed by activated charcoal, and for the removal of packages in body packers. Until more robust evidence is available from high-quality prospective studies demonstrating efficacy, the use of whole bowel irrigation should not be used routinely in poisoned patients.

Understanding Lithium-Ion Dynamics in Single-Ion and Salt-in-Polymer Perfluoropolyethers and Polyethyleneglycol Electrolytes Using Solid-State NMR

Lithium metal batteries with high energy densities can enable a revolution in energy storage and accelerate shifts in electric transportation and electricity generation. However, several morphological and electro-chemo-mechanical challenges impede their development. Solid-state electrolytes such as those based on polymers show great promise in replacing liquid electrolytes in lithium metal batteries. Polyether-based polymer electrolytes are the most investigated but are plagued by low room-temperature ionic conductivity and poor oxidative stability. Hence, there is great need for the development and understanding of ion transport in new classes of polymer electrolytes. Perfluoropolyether (PFPE)-based electrolytes have shown improved oxidative stability, but little is understood about their lithium solvation and transport mechanism. In this work, we use multinuclear solid-state magic angle spinning (MAS) nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to investigate the lithium cation environment and mobility in crosslinked single-ion and salt-in-polymer PFPE electrolytes and compare it directly to that of well-known polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolytes. We show that the interaction of the lithium cation with the polymer backbone is weaker in PFPE systems compared to PEG, likely resulting in stronger ion pairing in the PFPE systems. Line shape analyses show lower lithium mobility in PFPE electrolytes despite lower activation energies being derived from spin-lattice relaxation (T1) measurements as compared to those for the PEG systems. The rapid relaxation is instead ascribed to the local fluctuations caused by polymer backbone mobility. By studying different modes of ion binding (single-ion vs salt-in-polymer), we show that differences across polymer backbones (PFPE vs PEG) have a greater effect on mobility than differences in ion binding modes within each polymer class (especially when single-ion conducting site density is not high). Our ability to use MAS NMR to study polymer electrolytes in their native state opens new opportunities to develop and understand novel polymer or hybrid solid-state electrolytes for next-generation lithium metal batteries.

Observation of the application effect of low-volume polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution (PEG-ELS) combined with ascorbic acid tablets in bowel preparation for colonoscopy in hospitalized patients

This study explored the effectiveness and safety of low-volume polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution (PEG-ELS) combined with ascorbic acid tablets (PEG-ELS/Asc) in bowel preparation for a colonoscopy. A total of 240 hospitalized patients who underwent a colonoscopy in Wenzhou People's Hospital, Wenzhou Third Clinical College of Wenzhou Medical University from July 2020 to June 2022 were randomly divided into two groups, with 120 patients each. All of the participants were given a low-residue or residue-free diet one day before the examination and fasted after dinner (completed before 18:00) the day before the examination. The 2-L PEG-ELS/Asc group took 2-L PEG-ELS plus 10g ascorbic acid tablets once orally, while the 3-L PEG-ELS group took 3-L PEG orally on several occasions. The primary endpoint was the achievement of preparation adequacy and an overall colon cleansing score of ≥6, both assessed by blinded investigators using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). The bowel cleansing effect, polyp detection rate, adverse reaction rate, oral drug tolerance rate, renal function, and electrolyte level changes were also compared between the two patient groups. There were no significant differences in the success rate of bowel preparation, the detection rate of polyps, or the adverse reaction rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). The tolerance rate of bowel preparation in the 2-L PEG-ELS/Asc group was significantly higher than that in the 3-L PEG-ELS group (93.3% vs. 80.23%) (P < 0.05). The levels of creatinine, serum potassium, serum sodium, and serum chlorine of the two groups before and after bowel preparation were within the normal range. In addition, the intestinal cleaning effect of the two preparation schemes for the hospitalized patients with diabetes and constipation is worse than that of those without these conditions (P < 0.05). The effectiveness and safety of using 2-L PEG-ELS/Asc in bowel preparation for a colonoscopy in hospitalized patients were not inferior to using 3-L PEG-ELS. For patients with diabetes and constipation, the cleansing effect of the two bowel preparation options was not very satisfactory, and further clinical research is needed in this regard.

Efficacy of morning-only dose compared with split-dose polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution in bowel cleansing for afternoon colonoscopy

Introduction: The efficacy of colonoscopy in detecting abnormalities within the colon is highly dependent on the adequacy of the bowel preparation. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of morning only dose vs split-dose administration of polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution for colon cleansing in patients undergoing afternoon colonoscopy.&#x0D; Method: This was a comparative study conducted in Department of Medicine, Patan Academy of Health Sciences (PAHS), Patan Hospital, Nepal from November 2021 to June 2022. The ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Review Committee. Informed consent was taken from the patients. Patients aged &gt;18 y undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomly assigned to one of the two bowel preparation regimens- morning only or split-dose of PEG. The adequacy of bowel preparation was assessed by the endoscopist using Boston Bowel Preparation scale. Preparation to colonoscopy (PC) interval, adverse events and risk factors for poor bowel preparations were noted.&#x0D; Result: In this study, 110 patients were included in the final analysis- 55 received morning only regimen and 55 received split-dose. Mean Boston bowel preparation scales of Morning only and Split-dose regimen were 7.60 and 7.09 respectively (p= 0.019). Split-dose group had significant sleep disturbances compared to Morning only regimen (p&lt; 0.001), whereas nausea occurred significantly more often in Morning only regimen (p=0.012). Preparation to colonoscopy interval between 4-6 hours resulted in better bowel cleansing compared to PC interval of greater than 6 hours.&#x0D; Conclusion: Morning-only bowel preparation is more effective than Split-dose for achieving adequate colon cleansing for afternoon colonoscopy.

S2544 Acute Symptomatic Hyponatremia Following Single Balloon Enteroscopy With Water Immersion: Be on the Lookout

Introduction: The water immersion endoscopic method is a safe and often used endoscopic technique. We report a unique case of electrolyte abnormalities in a single balloon enteroscopy secondary to this procedure Case Description/Methods: A 70-year-old female with HTN and hypothyroidism presented for single balloon enteroscopy for removal of a retained capsule. The capsule was initially performed for the of work up of melena and iron deficiency anemia after a negative upper endoscopy and colonoscopy. Physical exam and labs prior to the procedure were normal, including a sodium level of 139. The patient underwent the planned enteroscopy with water emersion with an estimated amount of 4 L of water being used. Shortly after completion of the procedure, the patient was noted to be delirious and have an altered mental status. The patient became aphasic, began clenching her fists, and was shaking. A sodium level post-procedure was obtained and was 113. A head CT scan was performed and no central involvement was noted. The patient was managed with 3% hypertonic saline and her symptoms resolved. Over the next 2 days patient’s sodium level normalized and the patient was discharged from the hospital. Discussion: This is the first reported case of hyponatremia secondary to water immersion endoscopy. While there is an abundance of reports describing hyponatremia in urologic and gynecologic procedures those procedures generally use glycine and mannitol as their irrigate. With regards to GI procedures, hyponatremia secondary to polyethylene glycol-electrolyte preparation has infrequently been reported. Free water irrigation/immersion is generally regarded as safe during gastroenterological procedures. Our case, brings awareness to the possibility of symptomatic hyponatremia following prolonged enteroscopy with the use of large volume water irrigation/immersion. Absorption of ingested water and most solutes occur in the proximal small intestine. If a large amount of fluids are necessary then normal saline can be utilized instead of water. Limiting water to 1.5 liters and suctioning excess water can help minimize these complications. Clinicians should be aware of this serious complication when performing these procedures.

Observation on Effect of Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder Combined with Lactulose on Intestinal Cleaning before Colonoscopy in Patients with Constipation

Observation on Effect of Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder Combined with Lactulose on Intestinal Cleaning before Colonoscopy in Patients with Constipation

Effect of Compound Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Powder on the Quality of Gastrobowel Preparation before Enteroscopy Intervention.

Objective To study the effect of compound polyethylene glycol electrolyte powder (PGEP) on the quality of gastrobowel preparation before enteroscopy intervention. Methods From March 2021 to January 2022, among the patients who needed enteroscopy in our hospital, 280 patients who volunteered for this study were randomly selected as the research objects. All the subjects were randomly divided into the control group (140 cases) and the observation group (140 cases). Both groups received routine treatment before enteroscopy intervention. On this basis, patients in the control group were given 9 g of senna every day before operation, and 250 ml of 20% mannitol and 2500 ml of water were taken orally from 9:00 am to 11:00 am on the day of examination. Patients in the observation group took PGEP orally from 9:00 am to 11:00 am. The effective rate of bowel cleaning, the frequency of defecation and duration of diarrhea, the levels of blood electrolyte indexes such as Na+, K+, and Cl− before and after the intervention, and the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results The effective rate of bowel cleaning in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05). The frequency of defecation and duration of diarrhea in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). Compared with the control group, the levels of blood electrolyte indexes in the observation group after the intervention were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Using PGEP for gastrobowel preparation before enteroscopy intervention can achieve high bowel cleaning efficiency, short bowel preparation time, and low incidence of adverse reactions, which does not affect the water-electrolyte balance of patients, and the psychological state of patients before enteroscopy intervention is more stable. This program is worthy of clinical promotion.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Two Different Low-Volume Split-Dose Polyethylene Glycol Electrolytes Solution Bowel Preparation for Morning Colonoscopy.

Methods A total of 120 patients were randomized to receive either the control group (n = 64) or the experimental group (n = 65). Patients in the control group adopted the low-volume split-dose regimen one, and patients in the experimental group adopted the low-volume split-dose regimen two. Those randomized to regimen one were instructed to take 0.75 L PEG two hours after dinner the day before the colonoscopy and 1.5 L PEG 4 hours before the colonoscopy. Patients assigned to regimen two were invited to consume 1.5 L PEG two hours after dinner the day before the colonoscopy and 0.75 L PEG 4 hours before the colonoscopy. The quality of bowel preparation, rated according to a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), represented the primary outcome measure. Tolerability, satisfaction, and lesions detection rated were secondary outcomes. Results There was no significant difference between the transverse colon and right colon scores between the two groups (P > 0.05). The low-volume split-dose regimen two showed a higher success rate for cleansing of the right colon and overall colon (P < 0.05). For the comparison of the patients' bowel tolerance, there were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding thirst, abdominal pain or abdominal discomfort, abdominal distension, dizziness or headache, anal discomfort, and sleep disturbance (P > 0.05). However, regimen two had significantly less nausea, vomiting, and fatigue than regimen one (24.62% vs. 42.19%, P=0.034; 10.77% vs. 25.00%, P=0.035; 6.15% vs. 21.88%, P=0.010, respectively). Patient-reported satisfaction and willingness to repeat the bowel preparation were significantly higher for low-volume split-dose regimen two than for low-volume split-dose regimen one (P=0.011; P=0.015). Conclusions In early morning colonoscopies, the bowel-cleansing efficacy and patient tolerability of low-volume split-dose regimen two were superior to low-volume split-dose regimen one.