S858 Evaluation of an Oral Sodium Sulfate Solution for Patients With Prior Difficult or Incomplete Cleansing - A Prospective Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: A considerable proportion of patients encounter difficulties with existing bowel cleansing regimens for colonoscopy, resulting in suboptimal bowel visualization. This inadequacy in preparation impacts patients, endoscopists, those on the waiting list, and the endoscopy unit overall. Oral Sulfate Solution (OSS) has been proven to be efficacious in many situations and we hypothesized that it would benefit patients who experienced poor or inadequate preparations during their previous colonoscopy. Methods: A total of 120 patients with colonoscopies that were deemed as challenging to prepare were included in this prospective case series. Patients scheduled for outpatient colonoscopy were considered for enrolment and approached for consent if previous colonoscopy reports indicated our criteria of suboptimal preparation. Participants were allowed a light breakfast the day before the colonoscopy, consumed the first dose of OSS the evening prior, and the second dose 4 hours pre-colonoscopy appointment. The primary outcome measure was the adequacy of bowel preparation, evaluated using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), defined as an overall score greater than 6, with each segment scoring at least 2. Secondary outcome measures included time to cecum, volume suctioned, and tolerability rating. Analysis of descriptives and comparisons between adequate and inadequate preparations were conducted. Results: Participant mean age was 67 years (SD=7.151) and 54 (45%) were female. Twenty percent had diabetes. The average BBPS score was 7 (SD=1.757). Eighty-eight percent of the patients had an adequate preparation. 52.5% and 40.8% of participants used polyethylene glycol and a picosulfate based agent with bisacodyl in their past colonoscopy, respectively. Tolerability data demonstrated 107 (89.2%) participants cumulatively rated OSS overall as tolerable, easy or very easy to use. Patients were able to complete ingestion of the preparation 99.5% of the time. Nausea was experienced in 46 (38.3%) participants, 10 (8.3%) vomited, and 51 (42.5%) noted abdominal cramping, discomfort or pain. Conclusion: OSS showed a reduction to 12% inadequate bowel preparation. This is very encouraging given this group of patients had challenging preparation in the past. Its combination of effect, ease of use, and tolerability could deem it superior to traditional choice in these patients and can be used as a standard low volume 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".