Macrogol 4000 10g oral powder sachets sugar free

Colonoscopy is performed for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The quality of colonoscopy depends on adequate bowel cleansing. However, there is no standardized protocol for bowel preparation in children. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability profile of polyethylene glycol (PEG) compared with those of sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (SPMC) in children. The primary sources of the reviewed studies were Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. The databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing PEG 4000 to SPMC as a bowel cleansing solution. Six studies were included. The analysis showed that both PEG and SPMC are effective for bowel cleansing, while a split-dose regimen may be preferable to a day-before one. There were no differences between the two groups regarding adverse events (AEs) such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, bloating, and anal discomfort. Additionally, preparation with SPMC was preferred in terms of acceptability and compliance. Still, the need to place a nasogastric tube was significantly lower in the SPMC group compared to the PEG group and in the split dose regimen compared to the day before. In conclusion, PEG and SPMC are equally effective in obtaining an adequate bowel cleansing with a comparable AE rate; moreover, split-dose administration may be preferable to day-before one in terms of effective bowel cleansing. However, SPMC preparation is more acceptable seems to result in higher compliance, and to reduce the use of a nasogastric tube, that we encounter daily in clinical practice, is perceived as a stressful experience for children and their families.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

The diagnosis of Crohn's Disease (CD) is based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory tests, endoscopy, and imaging data. In Small Intestine Contrast Ultrasonography (SICUS), the ingestion of a macrogol solution as an oral contrast medium may optimize image quality. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of SICUS for CD. A literature search was performed in August 2023. We selected only studies where SICUS was compared to a technique that allows the assessment of the whole gastrointestinal tract, such as an MRE, a CT scan, or a surgical evaluation. We estimated pooled weighted sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio for positive and negative tests (PLR/NLR) of SICUS. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC) were drawn, and pooled areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated. Five studies with 325 CD patients were included. SICUS showed a pooled sensitivity for the diagnosis of 95% (95% confidence interval CI 89-99%), a specificity = 77% (95% CI 60-90%), and the AUC was 0.94. SICUS demonstrated a pooled sensitivity for strictures of 78% (95% CI 63-88%) and a specificity = 96% (95% CI 85-99%), with AUC = 0.93. For abscesses, SICUS demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 59-100%) and a specificity of 90% (95% CI 74-98%). Fistulae were detected with a pooled sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 46-95%) and a specificity of 92% (95% CI 75-99%). SICUS demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance compared to the gold standard despite some clinical scenarios (stenosis/fistulae) showing suboptimal diagnostic effectiveness.

Abstract licence: CC BY

ContextThere has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.ObjectiveThe aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.MethodsRCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.ResultsData were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.ConclusionCurrently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registration no.CRD42022360977 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977).

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is recommended as first-line treatment of pediatric functional constipation. However, the oral route of administration is often poorly feasible in children mostly due to poor palatability. Promelaxin microenemas exert a topical evacuative action and may offer a valuable option in pediatric FC. Aim: To assess whether Promelaxin microenemas would be non-inferior to PEG 4000 in young children with FC. Methods: This is a randomized, open-label, multi-centric, non-inferiority trial enrolling infants and young children aged 6-48 months, with FC according to Rome III criteria. After 1 week of run in, children were randomized to 2 weeks of Promelaxin or PEG, followed by a 6-week on-demand treatment period. Primary endpoint was response rate to randomized treatment, with "response" defined as at least 3 evacuations per week and an average increase of at least one evacuation per week as compared to baseline. Safety, stool consistency and the analysis of fecal microbiota were secondary endpoints. Results: Out of the 158 patients who entered the trial, 153 patients were treated (77 and 76, PEG and Promelaxin arm, respectively). In the primary analysis, the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment's effect lay entirely above the non-inferiority margin in both Full Set (FAS) and Per Protocol (PP) analyses, providing evidence of the non-inferiority of Promelaxin vs. PEG 4000 [response rate difference: 16.5% (CI 1.55-31.49%) and 11.03% (CI -5.58 to 27.64%), FAS and PP analyses, respectively]. Mean compliance to the randomized treatment was >80% in both arms. Secondary endpoints did not significantly differ between the two arms, except for the average number of total days of on-demand treatment that was significantly lower in the Promelaxin arm [14.6 (12.7) vs. 9.8 (9.1), mean (SD); primary endpoint responders in PEG and Promelaxin arm, respectively; p = 0.027]. Microbiota evenness significantly increased in the PEG 4000 arm at V4 as compared to the Promelaxin arm (p p = 0.036). Conclusions: Promelaxin microenemas are non-inferior to oral PEG in children with FC. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02751411.

Abstract licence: CC BY