China-Japan Friendship Hospital
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, 100029, China
NCT Number: NCT06339697
To investigate the role of different types of laxatives (compounded polyethylene glycol electrolyte dispersions and compounded sodium pico-sulfate) on the composition, evolution and recovery of the gut microbiome of patients with colonic polyps undergoing bowel preparation.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–90 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 4
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, 100029, China
Good and adequate bowel preparation is essential for colonoscopy, especially in patients requiring endoscopic treatment, and the role of bowel purgatives and their safety for patients has been extensively studied. There are several laxatives available in clinical practice, the most widely used being electrolyte-supplemented polyethylene glycol (PEG) solutions, and other types of laxatives such as compound sodium picosulfate (SP) have been developed subsequently.
When a large amount of laxative passes through the intestine, many microorganisms are removed from the intestine. Thus leading to significant changes in the composition of the intestinal microbiota during intestinal cleansing. There is no consensus on how gut cleansing affects the gut microbiome.
There are no studies exploring whether there are differences in the effects of different types of laxatives on the human gut microbiome. In this study, focusing on patients diagnosed with colon polyps, the investigators explored the effects on the composition, evolution, recovery and functional pathways of the patients' gut microbiome after the use of different types of laxatives and endoscopic treatment.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Bowel preparation with different types of laxatives (compounded polyethylene glycol electrolytes and compounded sodium picosulfate)
Time frame: Before bowel preparation, 7 days after bowel preparation, 14 days after bowel preparation
16s sequencing results of feces. Based on the abundance information (absolute and relative) from ZOTU and its taxonomic annotations, the total number of sequences at each taxonomic level (Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus) for each sample and its proportion of the total number of sequences were summarized.
Time frame: Before bowel preparation, 7 days after bowel preparation, 14 days after bowel preparation
Based on the species annotations and abundance information of all samples at the genus level, the genera of concern (30 genera with high default abundance rankings) and their abundance information in each sample are selected to draw heat maps. At the same time, and clustering at both the level of taxonomic information and differences between samples, one can look for patterns of aggregation of species or samples.
Time frame: Before bowel preparation, 7 days after bowel preparation, 14 days after bowel preparation
Includes both the diversity of species in the sample (Richness) and the overall evenness of the distribution of how many species make up the sample (Evenness). Indices such as Richness, Chao1, Shannon, Simpson, Dominance and Equitability are commonly used to assess the species diversity of a sample.
Time frame: Before bowel preparation, 7 days after bowel preparation, 14 days after bowel preparation
Beta Diversity is a comparison of microbial community composition between samples. Bray Curtis, Weighted UniFrac and Unweighted UniFrac distances were calculated based on the ZOTUs abundance information of the samples to assess the differences in microbial community composition between samples. Based on the above distance matrix, it was analyzed by multivariate statistical methods such as Principal Component Analysis, Principal Co-ordinates AnalysisUnweighted Pair-group Method with Arithmetic Means to further from the results to explore the differences in microbial community structure in each sample and the differences in the contribution of different classifications to the samples.
Time frame: Before bowel preparation, 7 days after bowel preparation, 14 days after bowel preparation
In the 16S analysis, a preliminary functional spectrum prediction analysis was performed. The constructed ZOTU sequences were aligned with bacterial 16S sequence databases of known function (e.g., KEGG 16S Sequence Database, Silva SSU Database,) to obtain information on bacterial abundance in environmental samples. This abundance information is mapped directly or indirectly to the annotated microbial genomes of the KEGG databases, combined with the number of 16S rRNA genes and the abundance information of the functional genes (characterized using the KEGG Ortholog, KO), to obtain functional data on (some of the) known bacteria contained in the samples, as well as their abundance information.
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
Age (how old)
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
Male or female
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
How many centimeters?
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
How many kilograms?
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
kg/cm2
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
Defined as current regular cigarette smoking
Time frame: Before bowel preparation
Defined as drinking of alcohol at least three times per week
Time frame: Within 24 hours after bowel preparation
A Boston Rating Scale was used, with cleanliness on a 4-point scale (0-3) and a total score (0-9).
Time frame: Within 2 weeks after bowel preparation
The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) consists of 15 questions covering 5 aspects of gastrointestinal symptoms: abdominal pain (including abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting), reflux, diarrhea (including diarrhea, loose stools, incontinence of stool, and urgency to defecate), dyspepsia (including ringing in the abdomen, abdominal distention, belching, and increased exhaustion of gas), constipation (including constipation, hard stools, and incomplete evacuation of bowel movements), with 4 answers per question. Each question provided 4 answers, and each symptom was scored from mild to severe, with scores ranging from 0 to 3. Finally, each item was summed up to give a total score, with higher scores suggesting that the patient's gastrointestinal symptoms were more severe. All the scales were filled out independently within 10-15 minutes by a uniformly trained physician who instructed the patients to review their symptoms within 1 month.
Time frame: Within 2 weeks after bowel preparation
Any discomfort complained of by the patient
Zhang Yanli
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT04369053
Adenoma, Colon Cancer
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07108569
Colon Polyp, Colonic Adenoma
Würzburg, Germany
View Trial DetailsNCT06345105
Artificial Intelligence, Colon Adenoma
Hong Kong
View Trial DetailsNCT05405530
Colon Cancer, Colon Polyp
Zhengzhou, Henan, China
View Trial Details