The effect of alverine citrate plus simethicone (Meteospazmyl ) on effectiveness and tolerability of bowel preparation for colonoscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of residual stool, bile, colonic bubbles, colonic dysmotility and spasm can hamper visualization of the colonic mucosa, increasing the risk of lesions being missed. Novel approach for overcoming colonic spasm as well as bubbles is peroral antispasmodic agent alverine citrate with simethicone. Objective. To evaluate the impact of Meteospasmil on the effectiveness and tolerability of colonoscopy preparation. Materials and methods. A prospective, single-center, comparative, randomized study included 65 patients who were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group (n=32) received standard two-stage osmotic laxative (Eziklen) preparation. The second group (n=33) received the same bowel preparation regimen with the addition of Meteospasmil. All patients had at least one risk factor for poor bowel preparation or poor tolerability. Bowel preparation quality was assessed using the Ottawa scale. Results. Excellent or good bowel preparation was achieved in all patients. The presence of colonic bubbles during colonoscopy was significantly lower in the Meteospasmil group (3.1%) compared to the non- Meteospasmil group (61%) (p<0.001). The total duration of colonoscopy was also significantly shorter in the Meteospasmil group (12.4 minutes) compared to the non- Meteospasmil group (14.8 minutes) (p=0.04). Polyps were detected in 35.5% of patients in the Meteospasmil group and 30.3% in the non- Meteospasmil group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion. The combination of the low-volume one-liter preparation Eziklen with predictable high-quality bowel cleansing, high safety, and Meteospasmil is a new direction in improving bowel cleansing quality in patient groups at increased risk of poor preparation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".