Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Sep 27, 2025; 17(9): 105983
Published online Sep 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i9.105983
Published online Sep 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i9.105983
Table 1 Patient characteristic among the three groups
Group | Gender | Age (year) | Reason for colonoscopy | |||||
Male | Female | Abdominal discomfort | Black stool/bloody stool | Constipation | Routine check-up | Other | ||
A (n = 29) | 16 | 13 | 52.77 ± 6.32 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 3 |
B (n = 50) | 26 | 24 | 53.65 ± 7.14 | 14 | 12 | 11 | 7 | 6 |
C (n = 37) | 18 | 19 | 53.29 ± 8.48 | 10 | 6 | 9 | 5 | 7 |
Statistic | 0.28 | 1.012 | 3.636 | |||||
P value | 0.869 | 0.367 | 0.888 |
Table 2 Comparison of Boston bowel preparation scale scores among the three groups
Group | Left colon | Transverse colon | Right colon | Total score |
A (n = 29) | 2.78 ± 0.45 | 2.70 ± 0.51 | 2.41 ± 0.55 | 7.75 ± 1.23 |
B (n = 50) | 2.74 ± 0.41 | 2.69 ± 0.48 | 2.32 ± 0.59 | 7.69 ± 1.14 |
C (n = 37) | 2.76 ± 0.49 | 2.56 ± 0.64 | 2.35 ± 0.66 | 7.66 ± 1.31 |
Statistic | 0.203 | 0.954 | 1.042 | 1.446 |
P value | 0.816 | 0.388 | 0.356 | 0.240 |
Table 3 Comparison of bowel preparation completion rate and detection of positive lesions among the three groups, n (%)
Group | Bowel preparation completion rate | Adenoma detection rate | Polyp detection rate |
A (n = 29) | 28 (96.55) | 6 (20.69) | 10 (34.48) |
B (n = 50) | 45 (90.00) | 19 (38.00) | 25 (50.00) |
C (n = 37) | 36 (97.30) | 12 (32.43) | 14 (37.84) |
Statistic | 2.453 | 2.539 | 2.243 |
P value | 0.293 | 0.281 | 0.326 |
Table 4 Comparison of colonoscopy examination time among the three groups
Group | Insertion time (minute) | Withdrawal time (minute) |
A (n = 29) | 6.03 ± 4.34 | 7.45 ± 2.91 |
B (n = 50) | 6.12 ± 3.60 | 9.02 ± 3.54 |
C (n = 37) | 5.33 ± 2.42 | 6.86 ± 2.66a |
Statistic | 0.541 | 3.717 |
P value | 0.584 | 0.027 |
Table 5 Comparison of adverse reaction rates among the three groups, n (%)
Group | Nausea | Abdominal pain | Palpitations | Vomiting | Dizziness | Total occurrence rate |
A (n = 29) | 1 (3.45) | 0 (0.00) | 1 (3.45) | 1 (3.45) | 1 (3.45) | 2 (6.90) |
B (n = 50) | 5 (10.00) | 2 (4.00) | 1 (2.00) | 5 (10.00) | 3 (6.00) | 10 (20.00) |
C (n = 37) | 1 (2.70) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 1 (2.70) | 0 (0.00) | 1 (2.70)a |
Statistic | 7.116 | |||||
P value | 0.029 |
Table 6 Comparison of patient satisfaction among the three groups, n (%)
Group | Satisfied | Neutral | Not satisfied | Total satisfaction rate |
A (n = 29) | 16 (55.17) | 10 (34.48) | 3 (10.34) | 26 (89.66) |
B (n = 50) | 26 (52.00) | 16 (32.00) | 8 (16.00) | 42 (84.00) |
C (n = 37) | 22 (59.46) | 14 (37.84) | 1 (2.70) | 36 (97.30) |
Statistic | 4.059 | |||
P value | 0.398 |
- Citation: Xue LW, Zhang YQ, Yu WL, Wen ZB. Application effect of linaclotide capsules combined with compound polyethylene glycol in colonoscopy bowel preparation. World J Gastrointest Surg 2025; 17(9): 105983
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9366/full/v17/i9/105983.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v17.i9.105983