Colorectal Cancer ScreeningNCT06664762
Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Colonoscopy
A study testing Left lateral position intervention and Supine position intervention in people with Colorectal Cancer Screening, run by Hospital Civil de Guadalajara at 3 sites in Mexico.
Trial summary
Currently, colonoscopy is a minimally invasive method that can be used as a diagnostic and therapeutic method by endoscopists, gastroenterologists and coloproctologists. Due to the importance and big impact this method has, it is necessary to both optimize its efficiency, and improve its quality, which is one of the… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 79 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Colorectal Cancer Screening
- What is being tested?
- Left lateral position intervention and Supine position intervention
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 144 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesMexico
- Study dates
- 27 Aug 2024to 6 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 79 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients with indication for colonoscopy in our coloproctology service
- Both women and men
- Patients within an age range of 18-79 years
- Patients who agree having a colonoscopy and who sign the informed consent to participate in the protocol
Who cannot join
- Patients under 18 or over 80 years old
- All patients that won´t like to participate in the protocol or won´t sign the informed consent
- Pregnant women
- Patients with a medical record of colonic resection, ostomy status, severe cardiopulmonary and renal diseases, major psychiatric disorders, therapeutic colonoscopy or any contraindications for colonoscopy
- Non compliance with the colonic preparation regimen
- Active bleeding during the procedure
Show all 15Show fewer
- Patients with a known diagnosis of colorectal cancer
- Patients with class III obesity
- Elimination criteria:
- Boston score <6 for colonic preparation
- Patients with a colonic lesion that makes it difficult to pass the colonoscope
- Patients with insufficient sedation that requires the procedure to stop temporarily
- Bowel perforation during colonoscopy
- Inability to reach the cecum despite loop reduction maneuvers
- Indication to suspend the study given by the anesthesiologist
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
Mexico3 sites
Antigüo Hospital Civil de Guadalajara "Fray Antonio Alcalde"
Guadalajara, Jalisco, 44200
Nuevo Hospital Civil de Guadalajara "Juan I. Menchaca"
Guadalajara, Jalisco, 44340
IMSS Hospital General Regional 220 "José Vicente Villada"
México, Toluca de Lerdo, 50150
About this study
Official title: Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Colonoscopy, a Multicenter Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial Study
Currently, colonoscopy is a minimally invasive method that can be used as a diagnostic and therapeutic method by endoscopists, gastroenterologists and coloproctologists. Due to the importance and big impact this method has, it is necessary to both optimize its efficiency, and improve its quality, which is one of the main objectives of this protocol.
By observing which position its faster and which one also results in fewer complications when performing a colonoscopy without reducing its performance and following all the internationally established quality standards regarding colonoscoscopy.
The risk of this protocol implies a risk no greater than the minumum the procedure itself has, and does not generate extra cost for all of the patients subjected to this protocol.
Read the detailed description
Currently, colonoscopy is one of the most used procedures when it comes to the study and treatment of patients with gastrointestinal conditions, including colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, etc.
In the area of colorectal neoplasia, colonoscopy has three main functions, which are to diagnose the desease itself and prevent its development by detecting and eliminating potentially premalignant lesions, as well as providing a diagnosis of cancer at an early stage.
The effectiveness of colonoscopy is crucial to carry out an accurate examination of the entire colorectal mucosa, which is why the quality of the procedure has been a subject of study in recent years. Among multiple factors that influence the quality of colonoscopies, the investigators can mention intestinal preparation, which is essential for an accurate procedure, because if patients have an inadequate preparation, it could impair the detection of lesions, since usually, in patients with little or no preparation, colonoscopy can be either incomplete, which requires the study to be repeated, or in case the study continues despite poor intestinal preparation, the presence of feces implies poor visualization of the colonic mucosa, which reduces the ability to detect lesions such as polyps, especially if they are <5 mm. Therefore, the type of solution and tolerability, the preparation regimen and the moment in which the intestinal preparation is performed are considerations to evaluate when performing a colonoscopy.
The position during the colonoscopy is another factor that can influence colonoscopy´s effectiveness, and also, the main focus for the investigators to study. Traditionally, if no position changes occur during colonoscopy, it begins and ends in the left lateral position. However, recent evidence suggests that supine position may reduce the disadvantages of the left lateral position, through decreased frequency of position changes and decreased abdominal pressure, which may result in an easier endoscope insertion in supine position when comparing it to left lateral position, however, there is very few information on the optimal insertion technique in colonoscopy, but it has been observed that in left lateral position, the air leaves the left colon causing it to collapse and also creating sharp curves that can be difficult to overcome during the procedure.
As previously mentioned, colonoscopy insertion is technically challenging, and one of the few clinical trials available that targeted the determination of optimal patient positioning during colonoscopy insertion compared the supine starting position with the left lateral starting position, and the investigators found that cecal intubation times decreased and patient comfort scores improved when using the supine position.
Therefore, patient positioning in colonoscopy has been proposed as a simple and inexpensive technique to increase luminal distension and improve navigation through the colon. Based on what has been mentioned before, using the initial supine position could be a convenient method to reduce cecal intubation time, reduce pain, and improve acceptance of colonoscopy among patients. However, more research is necessary in this area to stablish the advantages of the initial supine position over other positions thar are classically used.
Based on everything that has been described above, the investigators asked themselves the following research question to start this clinical trial: Is there a significant difference in the effectiveness and comfort of performing colonoscopy, when comparing the left lateral position with the supine position?
The institutes where this clinical trial will take place have subjects for study that are ellegible to enroll as participants, infraestructure and health care providers trained to perform colonoscopies and a complete investigators team to collect and analyze the data for this protocol.
The protocol will be limited only to patients who are beneficiaries of each of the hospitals involved. Furthermore, as it is a single-blind randomized clinical trial, the endoscopists in the study cannot be blinded, so investigator bias will not be excluded.
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer Screening
- Being tested
- Left lateral position intervention, Supine position intervention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Left lateral position interventionBehavioural
Patients will be randomized and asigned to start and remain in left lateral position during the colonoscopy
Supine position interventionBehavioural
Patients will be randomized and asigned to start and remain in supine position during the colonoscopy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Left lateral position during colonoscopy | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Behavioral: Left lateral position intervention |
| Supine position during colonoscopy | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Behavioral: Supine position intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to Cecal Intubation.
Time since insertion to cecal intubation despite the position for colonoscopy
Measured: 4-10 minutes, which is approximately 240-600 seconds
Secondary outcomes (1)
Number of Participants With at Least One Adenoma Detected During Colonoscopy
Adenoma detection was defined as the identification of at least one histologically confirmed adenomatous polyp during the procedure. The percentage was calculated based on the total number of participants analyzed in each group.
Measured: During colonoscopy
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Oct 2024
- Study start27 Aug 2024
- Primary completion30 Jul 2025
- Study completion6 Aug 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (14)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colorectal Cancer ScreeningStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- multicenter single-blind randomized clinical trial study
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider
- Enrolment
- 144 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Civil de Guadalajara
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Hospital Civil Juan I. Menchaca, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Roberto Ulises Cruz Neri, Hospital Civil de Guadalajara
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06664762
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 150/24
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 25 Oct 2024
- Last updated
- 29 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
de la Torre Bravo A. [The astonishing evolution of endoscopy]. Rev Gastroenterol Mex. 2001 Jan-Mar;66(1):58-9. No abstract available. Spanish.
PubMed 11464632Spaner SJ, Warnock GL. A brief history of endoscopy, laparoscopy, and laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997 Dec;7(6):369-73. doi: 10.1089/lap.1997.7.369.
PubMed 9449087Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koutras C, Antoniou AI. Endoscopy and laparoscopy: a historical aspect of medical terminology. Surg Endosc. 2012 Dec;26(12):3650-4. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2389-y. Epub 2012 Jun 21.
PubMed 22717798Irving MH, Catchpole B. ABC of colorectal diseases. Anatomy and physiology of the colon, rectum, and anus. BMJ. 1992 Apr 25;304(6834):1106-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6834.1106. No abstract available.
PubMed 1586826van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, Bossuyt PM, van Deventer SJ, Dekker E. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;101(2):343-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00390.x.
PubMed 16454841Neilson LJ, Bevan R, Panter S, Thomas-Gibson S, Rees CJ. Terminal ileal intubation and biopsy in routine colonoscopy practice. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 May;9(5):567-74. doi: 10.1586/17474124.2015.1001744. Epub 2015 Jan 12.
PubMed 25582839Vergis N, McGrath AK, Stoddart CH, Hoare JM. Right Or Left in COLonoscopy (ROLCOL)? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Right- versus Left-Sided Starting Position in Colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Nov;110(11):1576-81. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.298. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
PubMed 26416195Vergis N, Scarborough AJ, Morris JA, Hoare JM. Prone or Left for Colonoscopy? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Prone Versus Left-sided Starting Position for Colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2018 Nov/Dec;52(10):e82-e86. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000871.
PubMed 28644314Zhao S, Yang X, Meng Q, Wang S, Fang J, Qian W, Xia T, Pan P, Wang Z, Gu L, Chang X, Zou D, Li Z, Bai Y. Impact of the supine position versus left horizontal position on colonoscopy insertion: a 2-center, randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jun;89(6):1193-1201.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.009. Epub 2019 Jan 18.
PubMed 30660634Chokshi RV, Hovis CE, Hollander T, Early DS, Wang JS. Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jun;75(6):1197-203. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005. Epub 2012 Feb 28.
PubMed 22381531Cappell MS, Friedel D. The role of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy in the diagnosis and management of lower gastrointestinal disorders: technique, indications, and contraindications. Med Clin North Am. 2002 Nov;86(6):1217-52. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7125(02)00076-7.
PubMed 12510453Gangwani MK, Aziz A, Dahiya DS, Nawras M, Aziz M, Inamdar S. History of colonoscopy and technological advances: a narrative review. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Apr 20;8:18. doi: 10.21037/tgh-23-4. eCollection 2023.
PubMed 37197258Church J. Colonoscopy: what are we missing? Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2014 Jan;23(1):1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.soc.2013.09.001. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
PubMed 24267161Greene A, Borgoankar M, Hodgkinson K, Garland C, Bacque L, Pace D. A randomized controlled trial comparing right and left lateral decubitus starting position on outcomes in colonoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2020 Aug;34(8):3656-3662. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07661-x. Epub 2020 May 26.
PubMed 32458286
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Colonoscopy, a Multicenter Single-blind Randomized Clinical Trial Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06664762
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 150/24
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer Screening
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 144 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Civil de GuadalajaraUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Hospital Civil Juan I. Menchaca, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social
- Study start
- 27 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jul 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 6 Aug 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 29 Apr 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Currently, colonoscopy is a minimally invasive method that can be used as a diagnostic and therapeutic method by endoscopists, gastroenterologists and coloproctologists. Due to the importance and big impact this method has, it is necessary to both optimize its efficiency, and improve its quality, which is one of the main objectives of this protocol.
By observing which position its faster and which one also results in fewer complications when performing a colonoscopy without reducing its performance and following all the internationally established quality standards regarding colonoscoscopy.
The risk of this protocol implies a risk no greater than the minumum the procedure itself has, and does not generate extra cost for all of the patients subjected to this protocol.
Detailed description
Currently, colonoscopy is one of the most used procedures when it comes to the study and treatment of patients with gastrointestinal conditions, including colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, etc.
In the area of colorectal neoplasia, colonoscopy has three main functions, which are to diagnose the desease itself and prevent its development by detecting and eliminating potentially premalignant lesions, as well as providing a diagnosis of cancer at an early stage.
The effectiveness of colonoscopy is crucial to carry out an accurate examination of the entire colorectal mucosa, which is why the quality of the procedure has been a subject of study in recent years. Among multiple factors that influence the quality of colonoscopies, the investigators can mention intestinal preparation, which is essential for an accurate procedure, because if patients have an inadequate preparation, it could impair the detection of lesions, since usually, in patients with little or no preparation, colonoscopy can be either incomplete, which requires the study to be repeated, or in case the study continues despite poor intestinal preparation, the presence of feces implies poor visualization of the colonic mucosa, which reduces the ability to detect lesions such as polyps, especially if they are <5 mm. Therefore, the type of solution and tolerability, the preparation regimen and the moment in which the intestinal preparation is performed are considerations to evaluate when performing a colonoscopy.
The position during the colonoscopy is another factor that can influence colonoscopy´s effectiveness, and also, the main focus for the investigators to study. Traditionally, if no position changes occur during colonoscopy, it begins and ends in the left lateral position. However, recent evidence suggests that supine position may reduce the disadvantages of the left lateral position, through decreased frequency of position changes and decreased abdominal pressure, which may result in an easier endoscope insertion in supine position when comparing it to left lateral position, however, there is very few information on the optimal insertion technique in colonoscopy, but it has been observed that in left lateral position, the air leaves the left colon causing it to collapse and also creating sharp curves that can be difficult to overcome during the procedure.
As previously mentioned, colonoscopy insertion is technically challenging, and one of the few clinical trials available that targeted the determination of optimal patient positioning during colonoscopy insertion compared the supine starting position with the left lateral starting position, and the investigators found that cecal intubation times decreased and patient comfort scores improved when using the supine position.
Therefore, patient positioning in colonoscopy has been proposed as a simple and inexpensive technique to increase luminal distension and improve navigation through the colon. Based on what has been mentioned before, using the initial supine position could be a convenient method to reduce cecal intubation time, reduce pain, and improve acceptance of colonoscopy among patients. However, more research is necessary in this area to stablish the advantages of the initial supine position over other positions thar are classically used.
Based on everything that has been described above, the investigators asked themselves the following research question to start this clinical trial: Is there a significant difference in the effectiveness and comfort of performing colonoscopy, when comparing the left lateral position with the supine position?
The institutes where this clinical trial will take place have subjects for study that are ellegible to enroll as participants, infraestructure and health care providers trained to perform colonoscopies and a complete investigators team to collect and analyze the data for this protocol.
The protocol will be limited only to patients who are beneficiaries of each of the hospitals involved. Furthermore, as it is a single-blind randomized clinical trial, the endoscopists in the study cannot be blinded, so investigator bias will not be excluded.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (care provider)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- multicenter single-blind randomized clinical trial study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Left lateral position during colonoscopy | Active comparator | Behavioral: Left lateral position intervention |
| Supine position during colonoscopy | Active comparator | Behavioral: Supine position intervention |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 79 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients with indication for colonoscopy in our coloproctology service
- Both women and men
- Patients within an age range of 18-79 years
- Patients who agree having a colonoscopy and who sign the informed consent to participate in the protocol
Key exclusion criteria (15 listed)
- Patients under 18 or over 80 years old
- All patients that won´t like to participate in the protocol or won´t sign the informed consent
- Pregnant women
- Patients with a medical record of colonic resection, ostomy status, severe cardiopulmonary and renal diseases, major psychiatric disorders, therapeutic colonoscopy or any contraindications for colonoscopy
- Non compliance with the colonic preparation regimen
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Left lateral position interventionPatients will be randomized and asigned to start and remain in left lateral position during the colonoscopy | Behavioural | Left lateral position during colonoscopy |
| Supine position interventionPatients will be randomized and asigned to start and remain in supine position during the colonoscopy | Behavioural | Supine position during colonoscopy |
Primary outcome
Time to Cecal Intubation.
Time frame: 4-10 minutes, which is approximately 240-600 seconds
Time since insertion to cecal intubation despite the position for colonoscopy
1 secondary outcome
Number of Participants With at Least One Adenoma Detected During Colonoscopy
Time frame: During colonoscopy
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Apr 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 11464632de la Torre Bravo A. [The astonishing evolution of endoscopy]. Rev Gastroenterol Mex. 2001 Jan-Mar;66(1):58-9. No abstract available. Spanish.
- Background: PubMed 9449087Spaner SJ, Warnock GL. A brief history of endoscopy, laparoscopy, and laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997 Dec;7(6):369-73. doi: 10.1089/lap.1997.7.369.
- Background: PubMed 22717798Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koutras C, Antoniou AI. Endoscopy and laparoscopy: a historical aspect of medical terminology. Surg Endosc. 2012 Dec;26(12):3650-4. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2389-y. Epub 2012 Jun 21.
- Background: PubMed 1586826Irving MH, Catchpole B. ABC of colorectal diseases. Anatomy and physiology of the colon, rectum, and anus. BMJ. 1992 Apr 25;304(6834):1106-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6834.1106. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 16454841van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, Bossuyt PM, van Deventer SJ, Dekker E. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;101(2):343-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00390.x.
- Background: PubMed 25582839Neilson LJ, Bevan R, Panter S, Thomas-Gibson S, Rees CJ. Terminal ileal intubation and biopsy in routine colonoscopy practice. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 May;9(5):567-74. doi: 10.1586/17474124.2015.1001744. Epub 2015 Jan 12.
- Background: PubMed 26416195Vergis N, McGrath AK, Stoddart CH, Hoare JM. Right Or Left in COLonoscopy (ROLCOL)? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Right- versus Left-Sided Starting Position in Colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Nov;110(11):1576-81. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.298. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
- Background: PubMed 28644314Vergis N, Scarborough AJ, Morris JA, Hoare JM. Prone or Left for Colonoscopy? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Prone Versus Left-sided Starting Position for Colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2018 Nov/Dec;52(10):e82-e86. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000871.
- Background: PubMed 30660634Zhao S, Yang X, Meng Q, Wang S, Fang J, Qian W, Xia T, Pan P, Wang Z, Gu L, Chang X, Zou D, Li Z, Bai Y. Impact of the supine position versus left horizontal position on colonoscopy insertion: a 2-center, randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jun;89(6):1193-1201.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.009. Epub 2019 Jan 18.
- Background: PubMed 22381531Chokshi RV, Hovis CE, Hollander T, Early DS, Wang JS. Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jun;75(6):1197-203. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005. Epub 2012 Feb 28.
- Background: PubMed 12510453Cappell MS, Friedel D. The role of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy in the diagnosis and management of lower gastrointestinal disorders: technique, indications, and contraindications. Med Clin North Am. 2002 Nov;86(6):1217-52. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7125(02)00076-7.
- Background: PubMed 37197258Gangwani MK, Aziz A, Dahiya DS, Nawras M, Aziz M, Inamdar S. History of colonoscopy and technological advances: a narrative review. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Apr 20;8:18. doi: 10.21037/tgh-23-4. eCollection 2023.
Related trials for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Active, not recruiting
The PRIME-CRC Trial to Promote CRC Screening in Rural Communities
Colorectal Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Collecting Blood Samples From Patients With and Without Cancer to Evaluate Tests for Early Cancer Detection
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Active, not recruiting
Guardant Shield Colorectal Cancer Screening
Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Evaluation of Gixam's Repeatability and Reproducibility Predicting the Presence of Advanced and Non-Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia
CRC Screening
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma (The MATCH Screening Trial)
Advanced Lymphoma, Advanced Malignant Solid Neoplasm
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Left lateral position intervention and Supine position intervention in people with Colorectal Cancer Screening, run by Hospital Civil de Guadalajara at 3 sites in Mexico.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 15 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in Mexico. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 29 Apr 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to Cecal Intubation. (time frame: 4-10 minutes, which is approximately 240-600 seconds). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06664762, which also lists 14 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Apr 2026.