Polyethylene Glycol Preparation Research Articles

Gastric Residual Volume after Split-Dose Bowel Preparation versus Conventional Single-Dose Regimen before Anesthetic Colonoscopy.

The aim of this study was to compare gastric residual volume (GRV) in patients given a split-dose versus a conventional single-dose of polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation before undergoing anesthetic colonoscopy. Methods. In a prospective observational study, we assessed GRV in outpatients undergoing same-day anesthetic gastroscopy and colonoscopy between October 8 and December 30 of 2016. Outpatients were assigned to the split-dose (1 L PEG in the prior evening and 1 L PEG 2–4 h before endoscopy) or single-dose (ingestion of 2 L PEG ≥ 6 h before endoscopy) regimen randomly. Bowel cleansing quality was assessed with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Results. The median GRV in the split-dose group (17 ml, with a range of 0–50 ml; N = 65) was significantly lower than that in the single-dose group (22 ml, with a range of 0–62 ml; N = 64; p = 0.005), with a better bowel cleansing quality (BBPS score 8.05 ± 0.82 versus 7.64 ± 1.21; p = 0.028). GRV was not associated with diabetes or the use of medications. Conclusions. GRV after a split-dose preparation and fasting for 2–4 hours is not larger than that after a conventional single-dose preparation and fasting for 6–8 hours. The data indicates that the split-dose bowel preparation might not increase the risk of aspiration.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: Sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate as bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

An effective and tolerable bowel preparation is important to secure quality of colonoscopies. It remains unclear if sodium picosulphate with magnesium citrate (SPMC), which is considered a tolerable bowel preparation agent, is also an effective alternative for polyethylene glycol (PEG) and sodium phosphate (NaP). The aim of this article is to compare effectiveness of SPMC to PEG and NaP through assessment of quality of bowel cleansing measured by validated tools. We searched electronic databases up to January 2015. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two authors independently performed selection of studies, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Thirteen RCTs were included, with overall good quality, but large heterogeneity. SPMC had slightly better quality of bowel cleansing than PEG (pooled RR 1.06; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11). In most trials SPMC was significantly better tolerated than PEG. There were no significant differences in effectiveness or tolerability between SPMC and NaP. Side effects were similar between agents, except for dizziness (pooled RR 1.71; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.21 in favour of PEG vs. SPMC) and vomiting (pooled RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.95 in favour of single-dose SPMC vs. split-dose). SPMC is equally effective to NaP and little superior to PEG in terms of bowel cleansing. SPMC preparations were better tolerated than PEG preparations. SPMC may be considered as standard bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Phosphate tablets or polyethylene glycol for preparation to colonoscopy? A multicentre non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

Adequate bowel preparation is a crucial step in colonoscopy procedure and has been identified as the cornerstone of a quality colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) for bowel cleansing still had up to 10% unprepared colon. We herein compare efficacy, acceptability, tolerance and safety of sodium phosphate (NaP) tablets and split-dose PEG for bowel cleansing. A prospective non-inferiority randomized trial was performed and registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01840553). Patients were randomized to either 32 NaP tablets or 4L of PEG. Blind readers assessed the efficacy of colon cleansing using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). A total of 461 patients were randomized in groups (NaP group: n=231; PEG group: n=230). Median age was 54 and 52 in NaP group and PEG group, respectively (p<0.01). Patients experienced an overall compliance to the treatment in 99.6 and 94.1% in the NaP group and in the PEG group, respectively (p<0.001). The mean time of withdrawal was 15.1±8.9 and 15.4±9.5min in the NaP group and in the PEG group, respectively (p=0.95). The good quality of bowel preparation, defined as BBPS score ≥7, was obtained in 86.4 and 89.0% of cases in the NaP group and in the PEG group, respectively (p=0.42). In all segment (right colon, transverse colon and left colon and rectum), the NaP group was non-inferior to the PEG group. Bowel prep regimen was more frequently considered as "easy" by patients from the NaP group (54.8% of patients) than patients from the PEG group (29.0% of patients; p<0.001). No serious adverse events were reported. No statistical differences were found between the NaP group and the PEG group concerning the incidence of an adverse event (338 vs. 322, respectively). While NaP tablets appeared as efficient as PEG in terms of colon cleansing prior to a colonoscopy, they significantly improved the overall compliance and eased product administration. At an era where bowel cleansing appears to be the cornerstone of a quality colonoscopy, NaP tablets in patients without contraindication might be considered as an option.

Addition of Lubiprostone to polyethylene glycol(PEG) enhances the quality & efficacy of colonoscopy preparation: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial.

BackgroundAdequate bowel preparation is an essential prerequisite for complete mucosal visualization during colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions are commonly used. However the large volume of the solution is often poorly tolerated. Addition of Lubiprostone (LB) could improve the adequacy of standard PEG preparation & reduce requirement. The aims to assess adequacy of PEG preparation with addition of single dose LB (24mcg) vs placebo and efficacy of reduced dose PEG + LB compared with full dose PEG + LB.MethodsSingle center prospective double blind randomized controlled trial. Part I: 442 patients for colonoscopy randomized to receive placebo (GrA) or single dose of LB (GrB) prior to PEG preparation. Quality of bowel preparation graded 0–9 according to Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). BBPS-9: excellent and BBPS 0–4: repeat procedure.Part II: 146 patients randomized to receive LB + 1.5 L PEG (GrC; 75) or LB + 1 L PEG (GrD; 71). BBPS score compared with GrB (2 L PEG).ResultsPart I: 442 patients (221 GrA & 221 Gr B). LB resulted in significant improvement in total BBPS (7.44 + 0.14 vs. 6.36 + 0.16, p < 0.0001). 66.5 % Gr B vs 38 % Gr A had excellent prep; 42.5 % GrB vs 24 % GrA had adequate prep. Repeat procedure needed 9.5 % Gr B vs 16.7 % Gr A (P < 0.01).Part II: No difference in BBPS scores with lower doses (Gr C&D) compared to standard (GrB) (Mean BBPS 7.44 + 0.14 GrA,7.30 + 0.25 GrC;7.25 + 0.26 GrD;p >0.05).ConclusionSingle dose LB prior to PEG significantly enhanced bowel preparation compared to PEG alone. There was no significant difference in quality of preparation with lower doses of PEG when combined with LB.Trial registrationThe study protocol was approved by institutional review board and the trial was registered on March 22, 2011 with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01324284).

Osmotic and stimulant laxatives for the management of childhood constipation.

Osmotic and stimulant laxatives for the management of childhood constipation.

MicroRNA Imaging in Combination with Diagnostic Ultrasound and Bubble Liposomes for MicroRNA Delivery.

MicroRNA (miRNA) is expected to play an important role in the diagnosis and therapy of various diseases. In miRNA therapy, the development of delivery tools to the target site is considered to be essential. By using a delivery tool possessing imaging ability, miRNA colocalized with the carrier could be visualized after administration. We prepared polyethylene glycol (PEG)-modified liposomes containing echo-contrast gas, "Bubble liposomes" (BLs), and confirmed that BLs containing cationic lipid were capable of loading miRNA. Furthermore, we also achieved the imaging and delivery of systemically injected miRNA to target site in combination with ultrasound exposure. MiRNA-loaded BLs could be a useful tool for imaging and therapy.

Single‐day sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate versus split‐dose polyethylene glycol for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy: A prospective randomized endoscopist‐blinded trial

The intake of polyethylene glycol (PEG) prior colonoscopy is frequently associated with nausea and abdominal discomfort. The aim of this study was to investigate whether sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (PMC) is superior to a polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation in regard to patient acceptance. Furthermore, it investigates possible differences in efficiency and patient safety. In a randomised, prospective, and endoscopist-blinded study patients were 1:1 randomized to either use PMC or 4-L PEG in order to prepare for colonoscopy. Cleansing regimes consisted of a split-dose administration in the PEG arm and standard administration in the PMC arm. Primary end point was proportion of patients evaluating the bowel preparation procedure as "very distressing," defined as ≥ 8 points on a 10-point numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary end points were quality of bowel preparation and electrolyte parameters. PMC bowel-cleansing procedure was better tolerated compared with PEG (PMC(NRS<8) = 89.9% vs PEG(NRS<8) = 79.2%, P = 0.037). Mean declines in serum sodium (ΔSodium(PEG) = -0.76 ± 3.07 vs ΔSodium(PMC) = -3.38 ± 3.56 mmol/L; P < 0.001), chloride (ΔChloride(PEG) = -1.00 ± 3.22 vs ΔChloride(PMC) = -3.49 ± 3.51 mmol/L; P < 0.001), and osmolality (ΔOsmolality(PEG) = -4.23 ± 6.82 vs ΔOsmolality(PMC) = -8.83 ± 7.43 mosmol/kg; P < 0.001) were higher in the PMC arm than in the PEG arm. Hyponatremia after bowel preparation occurred more often in PMC (21.2%) than in PEG (4.0%) (P < 0.001). Successful preparation was achieved more frequently in the PEG arm (42.9% vs 82.2%; P < 0.001). Standard picosulfate/magnesium citrate is better accepted than a split-dose PEG regimen. From the perspective of successful preparation and patients' safety, PEG is superior to PMC.

PWE-003 Polyethylene glycol provides better bowel preparation than sodium picosulfate despite poorer patient tolerability

<h3>Introduction</h3> Bowel preparation for colonoscopy should be effective at bowel cleansing, have a low side-effect profile, be palatable and cost effective. Whilst a number of clinical trials and meta-analyses have attempted to identify which bowel preparation best meets these requirements, their results are contradictory. Although sodium picosulfate was used for most routine bowel preparation in our trust, we had noticed anecdotally that polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions led to better preparation. We therefore aimed to conduct a service improvement project to better evaluate this finding. <h3>Method</h3> We compared two PEG solutions (4 litre and 2 litre + ascorbic acid) and sodium picosulfate in relation to the above mentioned criteria. Bowel preparation quality was judged by blinded endoscopists using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), patients’ views regarding taste and tolerability of preparations were assessed by Visual Analogue Scales and side effects were recorded using a structured questionnaire. Cost was assessed by prices in the British National Formulary. <h3>Results</h3> 169 non-randomised patients were included in our evaluation. 4 litre and 2 litre PEG preparations yielded significantly better BBPS scores than sodium picosulphate of the right colon (2.44 and 2.35 vs 2.04 (<i>p &lt; 0.05)) </i>and bowel overall (BBPS 7.52 and 7.54 vs 6.53 (<i>p &lt; 0</i>.05)). There was no significant difference in the reported palatability of the preparations though both 4 litre and 2 litre PEG were considered less tolerable to consume (p &lt; 0.05). Reported side effects such as abdominal cramps, anal irritation and bloating, were more common with PEG based preparations. Although there was a trend favouring the side effect profile of sodium picosulfate, statistical significance was only demonstrated when comparing picosulfate with 2 litre PEG solution. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Despite poor patient tolerance and higher price, polyethylene glycol solutions provide superior bowel cleansing to sodium picosulphate. <h3>Disclosure of interest</h3> None Declared. <h3>References</h3> Juluri <i>et al</i>. Meta-analysis: randomized controlled trials of 4-L polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate solution as bowel preparation for colonosocopy. AP&amp;T. 2010;32:171 Belsey <i>et al</i>. Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. <i>AP&amp;T</i>. 2007;25:373 Joint Formulary Committee. <i>British National Formulary</i>(66 Ed). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press, 2014

Metronomic paclitaxel-loaded mPEG–PLA nanoparticles show enhanced anti-tumor efficacy compared to maximum tolerated dose administration

Low-dose metronomic (LDM) chemotherapy with cytotoxic agents, aimed at disrupting tumor endothelial cells, is an alternative method to maximum tolerated dose chemotherapy targeting proliferating tumor cells in clinical practice. However, even in the LDM schedule, cytotoxic agents still exhibit serious side effects due to non-distribution and high accumulated doses in the body. Nanocarriers can maximize the efficacy of the encapsulated drug by adjusting the pharmacokinetics and bio-distribution pattern, and minimize excessive toxic side effects. In the present study, we prepared polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated stealth nanoparticles containing paclitaxel (PTX-NP) in order to evaluate their accumulation in tumor and their anti-tumor activity following LDM administration. PTX-NPs were prepared by a modified emulsification/solvent diffusion method with methoxy PEG–poly(lactide). The in vitro viability, migration, and tube formation of primary human umbilical vein endothelial cells, in addition to thrombospondin-1 positive expression and microvessel density in vivo, confirmed the anti-angiogenic activity of PTX-NP. The cellular uptake and retention study, in addition to pharmacokinetics in Sprague–Dawley rats demonstrated sustained circulation of PTX-NP. The in vivo tumor accumulation of PTX-NP was monitored using the Xenogen IVIS 200 non-invasive optical imaging system. The anti-tumor activity of LDM PTX-NP was studied in B16 melanoma cancer-bearing mice in vivo. In conclusion, PTX-NP improved tumor accumulation and anti-tumor efficacy following LDM administration.

Importance of the time interval between bowel preparation and colonoscopy in determining the quality of bowel preparation for full-dose polyethylene glycol preparation.

Background/AimsThe quality of bowel preparation (QBP) is the important factor in performing a successful colonoscopy. Several factors influencing QBP have been reported; however, some factors, such as the optimal preparation-to-colonoscopy time interval, remain controversial. This study aimed to determine the factors influencing QBP and the optimal time interval for full-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation.MethodsA total of 165 patients who underwent colonoscopy from June 2012 to August 2012 were prospectively evaluated. The QBP was assessed using the Ottawa Bowel Preparation Scale (Ottawa) score according to several factors influencing the QBP were analyzed.ResultsColonoscopies with a time interval of 5 to 6 hours had the best Ottawa score in all parts of the colon. Patients with time intervals of 6 hours or less had the better QBP than those with time intervals of more than 6 hours (p=0.046). In the multivariate analysis, the time interval (odds ratio, 1.897; 95% confidence interval, 1.006 to 3.577; p=0.048) was the only significant contributor to a satisfactory bowel preparation.ConclusionsThe optimal time was 5 to 6 hours for the full-dose PEG method, and the time interval was the only significant contributor to a satisfactory bowel preparation.

Layer-by-layer generation of PEG-based regenerable immunosensing surfaces for small-sized analytes.

Small molecules (haptens) like pharmaceuticals or peptides can serve as targets for antibody binding in competitive immunoassay-based flow-through assays. In this work, a strategy for preparing polyethylene glycol (PEG) coatings for subsequent hapten immobilization on glass-type silica surfaces is presented and characterized in detail. Two substrates bearing terminal silanol groups were utilized, a glass slide and a silicon wafer. First, surfaces were thoroughly cleaned and pretreated to generate additional silanol groups. Then, a silane layer with terminal epoxy groups was created using 3-glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane (GOPTS). Epoxy groups were used to bind a layer of diamino-poly(ethylene glycol) (DAPEG) with terminal amino groups. Finally, the low molecular weight compound diclofenac was bound to the surface to be used as model ligand for competitive biosensing of haptens. The elementary steps were characterized using atomic force microscopy (AFM), water contact angle measurement, grazing-angle attenuated total reflection (GA-ATR) FT-IR spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). The data collected using these techniques have confirmed the successive grafting of the molecular species, evidencing, that homogeneous monolayers were created on the silica surfaces and validated the proposed mechanism of functionalization. The resulting surfaces were used to investigate polyclonal anti-diclofenac antibodies recognition and reversibility using quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation (QCM-D) measurements or an automated flow-through immunoassay with chemiluminescence (CL) read-out. For both techniques, recognition and reversibility of the antibody binding were observed. The stability of sensors over time was also assessed and no decrease in CL response was observed upon 14 days in aqueous solution. The herein presented strategy for surface functionalization can be used in the future as reproducible and reusable universal platform for hapten biosensors.

Bowel preparations for colonoscopy: an RCT.

The ideal preparation regimen for pediatric colonoscopy remains elusive, and available preparations continue to represent a challenge for children. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and acceptance of 4 methods of bowel cleansing before colonoscopy in children. This randomized, investigator-blinded, noninferiority trial enrolled all children aged 2 to 18 years undergoing elective colonoscopy in a referral center for pediatric gastroenterology. Patients were randomly assigned to receive polyethylene glycol (PEG) 4000 with simethicon (PEG-ELS group) or PEG-4000 with citrates and simethicone plus bisacodyl (PEG-CS+Bisacodyl group), or PEG 3350 with ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc group), or sodium picosulfate plus magnesium oxide and citric acid (NaPico+MgCit group). Bowel cleansing was evaluated according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale. The primary end point was overall colon cleansing. Tolerability, acceptability, and compliance were also evaluated. Two hundred ninety-nine patients were randomly allocated to the 4 groups. In the per-protocol analysis, PEG-CS+Bisacodyl, PEG-Asc, and NaPico+MgCit were noninferior to PEG-ELS in bowel-cleansing efficacy of both the whole colon (P = .910) and colonic segments. No serious adverse events occurred in any group. Rates of tolerability, acceptability, and compliance were significantly higher in the NaPico+MgCit group. Low-volume PEG preparations (PEG-CS+Bisacodyl, PEG-Asc) and NaPico+MgCit are noninferior to PEG-ELS in children, representing an attractive alternative to high-volume regimens in clinical practice. Because of the higher tolerability and acceptability profile, NaPico+MgCit would appear as the most suitable regimen for bowel preparation in children.

How to predict adequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy using conventional polyethylene glycol: Prospective observational study based on survey

The present study investigated the conditions and predictive factors for adequate bowel preparation using 4-L polyethylene glycol (PEG) preparation in clinical practice. We conducted a prospective-survey-based observational study. The survey consisted of 14 questions that assessed the preparation method (group 1: split method for morning colonoscopy; group 2: full-volume method for same-day afternoon colonoscopy; group 3: full-volume method for next-day morning colonoscopy), dinner type and timing the day before colonoscopy, elapsed time after PEG consumption, and stool character and defecation frequency immediately before colonoscopy. Preparation status was compared using the Boston bowel preparation scale (BBPS). Total of 465 surveys (391 for group 1, 55 for group 2, 19 for group 3) were conducted. Mean BBPS score was highest in group 1 and lowest in group 3 (P < 0.001). Fasting dinner before colonoscopy group showed a higher mean BBPS than the diet group; eating before 6 p.m. and a low-residue diet showed a higher mean BBPS (P < 0.05). Defecation frequency (>5 times) was related to adequate preparation in the left colon and elapsed time (<5 h) to that in the right colon (P < 0.05). Liquid stool without solid material immediately before colonoscopy was related to adequate preparation (P < 0.001). In bowel preparation with 4-L PEG, elapsed time after PEG consumption (<5 h), defecation frequency (>5 times) and liquid stool without solid material immediately before colonoscopy were predictive factors for adequate bowel preparation just before colonoscopy.

Su1549 Colonic Preparation Before Colonoscopy: Evaluation of a New Method With Intracolonic Infusion of Water Compared to Classical Administration of PEG

Bowel cleansing before colonoscopy is currently based upon lavage solutions of polyethylene glycol (PEG) or NaP with large amounts of fluids ingested in a splitted manner. This prospective randomized study compared a PEG protocol with a new method of bowel cleansing based upon infusion of water into the colon at low pressure (PrepSystem, novoGI, Netanya, Israel). Patients and Method: The device for water infusion (novoGI, Lifestream, Austin, TX) is made of a reservoir of water maintained at 37°C. The patient is installed on an adapted seat allowing easy evacuation of water and faeces. Water is infused by gravity through a cannula, into the rectum. Patients with an indication of colonoscopy and no history of colorectal surgery or IBD were randomly assigned to PEG preparation (2L PEG in the evening before and 2L in the morning of colonoscopy) or the Prepsystem. All patients followed a low residue diet for 5 days. In the Prepsystem group, sennosides (Pursennide 80mg, Novartis, Rueil Malmaison, France) were administered in the evening before and patients underwent 2 cleansing cycles, by infusion of 35L tap water each, about one hour before the colonoscopy. Quality of bowel cleansing was assessed with the Boston score by an endoscopist blinded to the preparation type. Boston scores in both groups were compared with a non-parametric test, with a signifcance level of 5%.

A Randomized Prospective Study of Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy with Low-Dose Sodium Phosphate Tablets versus Polyethylene Glycol Electrolyte Solution.

Optimal bowel preparation is essential for the safety and outcome of colonoscopy. A solution containing polyethylene glycol (PEG) is often used as a bowel cleansing agent, but some patients are intolerant of PEG, and this may lead to discontinuation of colonoscopy. Sodium phosphates (NaP) tablets are designed to improve patient acceptance and compliance. The objective of this study was to compare bowel preparation efficiency and patient acceptance of a 30 NaP tablet preparation (L-NaP) and a 2 L PEG preparation. Patients were randomized into either the L-NaP or PEG group. The primary endpoint was the efficiency of colon cleansing as assessed by a validated four-point scale according to the Aronchick scale by endoscopists and was verified by blinded investigators. The secondary endpoints were patients' tolerability and acceptance. Colon-cleansing efficiency was not significantly different between the two preparations. However, patients' overall judgment was significantly in favor of L-NaP, reflecting better acceptance of L-NaP than PEG. Additionally, more patients favored L-NaP over PEG in a hypothetical future occasion requiring colonoscopy.

Seizure Associated with Hyponatremia Possibly Related to the Use of Polyethylene Glycol and Electrolytes Preparation

Osmotic laxative preparation combining polyethylene glycol (PEG) and electrolytes (sodium and potassium chloride, sodium bicarbonate and sodium sulphate) are frequently used in diagnosis colonoscopy [1,2]. Various preparations of PEG that need to be diluted in water are available. Potential advantage of their use over other preparations is the absence of electrolyte and fluid disturbances, since they do not induce ion or water absorption or secretion compared with other bowel preparations available [1-4]. The present report relates the case of a 53year-old woman presenting with seizures related to severe electrolyte disturbances following the intake of a polyethylene glycol and electrolytes based laxative.

Preparation, Characterization and Uptake of PEG-Coated, Muco-Inert Nanoparticles in HGC-27 Cells, a Mucin-Producing, Gastric-Cancer Cell Line

To prepare polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated, muco-inert nanoparticles, we investigated the interaction between nanoparticles and mucin, and analyzed the cellular uptake of nanoparticles in HGC-27 cells, which are a mucin-producing, gastric cancer cell line. Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles were manufactured through a nanoprecipitation/emulsion evaporation technique, and coumarin-6 was encapsulated as a fluorescent marker. We characterized and evaluated the nanoparticles. We examined the cellular uptake of PLGA nanoparticles in HGC-27 cells with confocal laser scanning microscopy and flow cytometry. Nanoparticles prepared using a nanoprecipitation method were 120-150 nm in size, while nanoparticles prepared using an emulsion evaporation method were 400-450 nm in size. EE% of coumarin-6 in the nanoparticles was more than 80%. The anti-adhesive ability of nanoparticles to pig-gastric mucin (PM) was notably affected by PEG coating-density, 10% PEG2000-PLGA nanoparticles and 15% PEG2000-PLGA nanoparticles possessed the strongest resistance to PM. However, the PLGA nanoparticles were strong while the chitosan-loaded nanoparticles were very weak. Our results from both confocal laser scanning microscopy as well as flow cytometry showed that mPEG-PLGA-NPs are rapidly uptaken by mucin-producing HGC-27 cells. The number of 10% mPEG-PLGA-NPs taken up by cells was 1.6- to 2.1-fold higher than PLGA-NPs incubated for the same amount of time. In conclusion, mPEG-PLGA-NPs possess hydrophilic and near-neutrally-charged surfaces that minimize mucoadhesion by reducing hydrophobic or electrostatic interactions. Both the low-PEG MW and the high density of PEG surface coverage are critical for the uptake of mPEG-PLGA-NPs in HGC-27 cells. At the same time, the size of nanoparticles was also very important.

Mid-afternoon versus Evening Start Time for Polyethylene Glycol Preparation in Hospitalized Patients Undergoing Next Day Colonoscopy

Mid-afternoon versus Evening Start Time for Polyethylene Glycol Preparation in Hospitalized Patients Undergoing Next Day Colonoscopy

Seizures due to hyponatremia following polyethylene glycol preparation; a report of two cases

Seizures due to hyponatremia following polyethylene glycol preparation; a report of two cases

Tu1369 Low-Volume Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Plus Ascorbic Acid Versus Standard PEG Solution for Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy - a Randomized Controlled Study

Adequate bowel preparation is essential for an accurate assessment of the entire colon during colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been widely used for its high effectiveness for bowel cleansing but generally hardly tolerated that may contribute to poor patient compliance. Therefore, this study was designed to compare the 2-L PEG combined with ascorbic acid (PEG + Asc) with a standard 4-L PEG preparation in the efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction of bowel cleansing.