Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

The introduction of device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) in the beginning of the 21st century has revolutionized the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the small intestine. In contrast to capsule endoscopy, the other main diagnostic modality of small bowel diseases, DAE has the unique advantages of allowing the observation of the region of interest in detail and enabling tissue acquisition and therapeutic intervention. As DAE becomes an essential procedure in daily clinical practice, there is an increasing need for correct guidelines on when and how it is to be performed and what technical factors should be taken into consideration. In response to these needs, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases has developed an expert consensus statement on the performance of DAE by reviewing current evidence. This expert consensus statement particularly focuses on the indications, choice of insertion route, therapeutic intervention, complications, and relevant technical points.

Background/Aims: There have been little research on the cancer risks of patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) in Korea. We aimed to investigate the clinical features of PJS patients and their cancer incidence rate. Methods: Patients with PJS from nine medical centers were enrolled. In those patients diagnosed with cancer, data obtained included the date of cancer diagnosis, the tumor location, and the cancer stage. The cumulative risks of gastrointestinal cancers and extra-gastrointestinal cancers were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 96 PJS patients were included. The median age at diagnosis of PJS was 23.4 years. Cancer developed in 21 of the 96 patients (21.9%). The age of PJS diagnosis was widely distributed (0.9 to 72.4 years). The most common cancers were gastrointestinal cancer (n = 12) followed by breast cancer (n = 6). The cumulative lifetime cancer risk was calculated to be 62.1% at age 60. The cumulative lifetime gastrointestinal cancer risk was 47.1% at age 70. The cumulative lifetime extra- gastrointestinal cancer risk was 40.3% at age 60. Conclusions PJS onset may occur at any age and the risks of gastrointestinal and extra-gastrointestinal cancer are high. Thorough surveillance of PJS patients for malignancies is vital.

The introduction of device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) in the beginning of 21st century has revolutionized the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the small intestine. In contrast to capsule endoscopy, the other main diagnostic modality of the small bowel diseases, DAE has the unique advantages of observing the region of interest in detail and enabling tissue acquisition and therapeutic intervention. As DAE becomes an essential procedure in daily clinical practice, there is an increasing need for correct guidelines on when and how to perform it and what technical factors should be considered. In response to these needs, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases developed an expert consensus statement on the performance of DAE by reviewing the current evidence. This expert consensus statement particularly focuses on the indications, choice of insertion route, therapeutic intervention, complications, and relevant technical points.

Background: The quality-of-life of patients with irritable bowel syndrome is low; incorrect diagnosis/treatment causes economic burden and inappropriate consumption of medical resources. This survey-based study aimed to analyze the current status of irritable bowel syndrome treatment to examine differences in doctors’ perceptions of the disease, and treatment patterns. Methods: From October 2019 to February 2020, the irritable bowel syndrome and Intestinal Function Research Study Group of the Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility conducted a survey on doctors working in primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare institutions. The questionnaire included 37 items and was completed anonymously using the NAVER platform (a web-based platform), e-mails, and written forms. Results: A total of 272 doctors responded; respondents reported using the Rome IV diagnostic criteria (amended in 2016) for diagnosing and treating irritable bowel syndrome.Several differences were noted between the primary, secondary, and tertiary physicians’ groups. The rate of colonoscopy was high in tertiary healthcare institutions. During a colonoscopy, the necessity of random biopsy was higher among physicians who worked at tertiary institutions. ‘The patient did not adhere to the diet’ as a reason for ineffectiveness using low-fermentable oligo-, di-, and mono-saccharides, and polyols diet treatment was higher among physicians in primary/secondary institutions, and ‘There are individual differences in terms of effectiveness’ was higher among physicians in tertiary institutions. In irritable bowel syndrome constipation predominant subtype, the use of serotonin type 3 receptor antagonist (ramosetron) and probiotics was higher in primary/secondary institutions, while serotonin type 4 receptor agonist was used more in tertiary institutions. In irritable bowel syndrome diarrhea predominant subtype, the use of antispasmodics was higher in primary/secondary institutions, while the use of serotonin type 3 receptor antagonist (ramosetron) was higher in tertiary institutions. Conclusion Notable differences were observed between physicians in primary/secondary and tertiary institiutions regarding the rate of colonoscopy, necessity of random biopsy, the reason for the ineffectiveness of low-fermentable oligo-, di-, and mono-saccharides, and polyols diet, and use of drug therapy in irritable bowel syndrome. In South Korea, irritable bowel syndrome is diagnosed and treated according to the Rome IV diagnostic criteria, revised in 2016.

Background/Aims: Although balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) enables endoscopic visualization of small bowel (SB) involvement in Crohn’s disease (CD), there is no data on the changes in outcomes over time. We therefore investigated the changes in BAE use on CD patients over different time periods in terms of its role and clinical outcomes. Methods: We used a multicenter enteroscopy database to identify CD patients with SB involvement who underwent BAE (131 procedures, 116 patients). We compared BAE-related factors and outcomes between the first period (70 procedures, 60 patients) and the second period (61procedures, 56 patients). The specific cutoff point for dividing the two periods was 2007, when BAE guidelines were introduced. Results: Initial diagnosis of SB involvement in CD was the most common indication for BAE during each period (50.0% vs 31.1%, p=0.034). The largest change was in the number of BAE uses for stricture evaluation and/or treatment, which increased significantly in the latter period (2.9% vs 21.3%, p=0.002). The diagnostic yield in patients with suspected CD was 90.7% in the first period and 95.0% in the second (p=0.695). More endoscopic interventions were performed in the second period than in the first (5.1% vs 17.6%, p=0.041). Enteroscopic success rates were high throughout (100% in the first period vs 80.0% in the second period, p>0.999). In the first and second periods, therapeutic plans were adjusted in 62.7% and 61.4% of patients, respectively. Conclusions The overall clinical indications, outcomes, and effectiveness of BAE were constant over time in CD patients with SB involvement, with the exception that the frequency of enteroscopic intervention increased remarkably.

Background/Aims: Although second-look endoscopy (SLE) is frequently performed after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to prevent bleeding, no studies have reported SLE findings after colorectal ESD. This study aimed to investigate SLE findings and their role in preventing delayed bleeding after colorectal ESD. Methods: Post-ESD ulcer appearances were divided into coagulation (with or without remnant minor vessels) and clip closure groups. SLE findings were categorized according to the Forrest classification (high-risk ulcer stigma [type I and IIa] and low-risk ulcer stigma [type IIb, IIc, III, or clip closure]), and risk factors for high-risk ulcer stigma were analyzed. Results: Among the 375 cases investigated, SLEs were performed in 171 (45.6%) patients. The incidences of high-risk ulcer stigma and low-risk stigma were 5.3% (9/171) and 94.7% (162/171), respectively. During SLE, endoscopic hemostasis was performed more frequently in the high-risk ulcer stigma group than in the lowrisk ulcer stigma group (44.4% [4/9] vs. 1.9% [3/162], respectively; p < 0.001), but most of the endoscopic hemostasis in the high-risk ulcer stigma group (3/4, 75.0%) were prophylactic hemostasis. Post-ESD delayed bleeding occurred in three (0.8%) patients belonging to the SLE group, of which, one patient was from the high-risk stigma group and two were from the low-risk stigma group. Conclusions The incidence of high-risk ulcer stigma during SLE was low, and delayed bleeding occurred in, both, high-risk and low-risk groups of SLE. SLEs performed after colorectal ESD may not be effective in preventing delayed bleeding, and further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of SLE in post-colorectal ESD.