CirrhosisPhase 3CIRRHOPREPNCT07668778
Evaluation of a Modified Bowel Preparation Regimen in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy
A Phase 3 study testing 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet and 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet in people with Cirrhosis and Bowel Preparation, run by Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta Delgada at 4 sites in Portugal.
Trial summary
Inadequate bowel preparation compromises colonoscopy quality and diagnostic accuracy, and cirrhosis is a recognized independent predictor of poor bowel cleansing. However, no bowel preparation regimen has been prospectively validated or specifically tailored for cirrhotic patients. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Cirrhosis, Bowel Preparation
- What is being tested?
- 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet and 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 252 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesPortugal
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2026to 30 Oct 2027
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Established diagnosis of cirrhosis, scheduled for elective outpatient total colonoscopy
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Ability to follow verbal and written instructions in Portuguese
Who cannot join
- Urgent procedures
- Colonoscopies not intended to reach the caecum
- History of any colonic surgery
- Absolute contraindication to bowel preparation or colonoscopy
- Active hepatic encephalopathy (West Haven grade ≥2) at the time of enrolment
- Refractory ascites, defined as ascites unresponsive to maximum diuretic therapy or requiring repeated large-volume paracentesis
- Severe hyponatraemia (serum sodium <125 mEq/L) at the time of enrolment
- Subject refusal or inability to comprehend the trial
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Portugal4 sites
ULS de Coimbra
Coimbra, 3004-561
Hospital Central do Funchal, SESARAM
Funchal, Madeira, 9004-514
Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta Delgada
Ponta Delgada, São Miguel, 9500-370
Nadine Amaral, nadine.amaral8@gmail.com
ULS da Arrábida
Setúbal, 2910-446
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of a Modified Bowel Preparation Regimen in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy: a Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial
Inadequate bowel preparation compromises colonoscopy quality and diagnostic accuracy, and cirrhosis is a recognized independent predictor of poor bowel cleansing. However, no bowel preparation regimen has been prospectively validated or specifically tailored for cirrhotic patients.
This multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial will evaluate whether the addition of adjunctive measures as an intensified bowel preparation protocol improves bowel cleansing quality in adult patients with cirrhosis undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy.
Read more
Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either a standard bowel preparation protocol, consisting of a 2-litre split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) regimen combined with a one-day low-residue diet and clear liquids the afternoon before the procedure (control), or the same split-dose regimen with the assigned adjunctive measures: 15 mg bisacodyl, a 3-day low-residue diet, and clear liquids the day before colonoscopy (intervention).
The primary outcome is the proportion of patients achieving adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) total score ≥6 with no individual segment score <2. Secondary outcomes include polyp, adenoma, advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer detection rates, caecal intubation rate, patient compliance, tolerability, and adverse events. Pre-specified subgroup analyses will evaluate the influence of etiology and severity of cirrhosis and portal hypertension complications.
By addressing a critical and unmet clinical need, this trial aims to generate high-quality evidence to optimize bowel preparation strategies in patients with cirrhosis, improve colonoscopy quality, and ultimately enhance colorectal cancer screening outcomes in this vulnerable population.
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
Optimal diagnostic yield in colonoscopy is critically dependent on the quality of bowel preparation. Inadequate bowel preparation, observed in up to 25% of colonoscopies, adversely impacts procedural performance and diagnostic accuracy, with significantly reduced detection rates of adenomas and advanced adenomas, increased risk of undetected colorectal cancer, longer procedure times, and need for repeat colonoscopy.
Cirrhosis has been consistently identified as an independent predictor of inadequate bowel preparation, with studies reporting suboptimal cleansing in 29.8-49% of cirrhotic patients undergoing colonoscopy. Proposed mechanisms include impaired gastrointestinal motility related to autonomic dysfunction, metabolic derangements, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, and increased bacterial translocation, serving as a potential trigger for several complications associated with chronic liver disease.
Suboptimal bowel preparation may be particularly detrimental in patients with cirrhosis as chronic liver diseases may place patients at increased risk of colorectal cancer, making adequate bowel preparation essential to maximize the efficacy of screening with colonoscopy.
Studies that have reported on modified strategies for individuals with previous inadequate bowel preparation include prolonged low-fibre diets, the addition of promotility agents and/or the use of high-volume bowel preparation regimens. Recently, the US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) developed a consensus statement addressing bowel preparation regimens for individuals at high risk for inadequate bowel preparation, suggesting a split-dose high volume PEG formulation plus 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before the colonoscopy, along with a low-fibre diet 2 to 3 days before colonoscopy, changing to clear-liquid diet the day before colonoscopy.
To date, no randomized controlled trials have established a superior or specifically tailored bowel preparation regimen for patients with cirrhosis. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate whether an intensified bowel preparation protocol improves bowel cleansing quality in adult patients with cirrhosis undergoing colonoscopy.
STUDY DESIGN, RANDOMIZATION AND BLINDING
This is a multicentre prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial conducted at the endoscopy unit of the Gastroenterology Department of Portuguese centers. The coordinator centre is Gastroenterology Department of the Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo of Ponta Delgada. This trial was designed with the participation of four centres in Portugal. The addition of new participating sites during the recruitment period is permitted if it occurs before 50% of the total planned sample has been enrolled.
A total of 252 participants will be enrolled and randomized to one of two arms: control group (regimen A) will receive the standard bowel preparation without any additional interventions (2-L PEG regimen combined with a one-day low-fibre diet and transition to clear liquids the afternoon before colonoscopy), whereas the intervention group (regimen B) will receive the same 2-L PEG regimen in combination with the assigned adjunctive measures: (1) 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before the colonoscopy, (2) follow a 3-day low-fibre diet before the procedure and (3) clear liquids for the entire day before colonoscopy.
Randomization will be performed centrally using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Data entry will be performed online through REDCap.
Blinding of the endoscopist will be strictly enforced. Before entering the endoscopy suite, the patient will be instructed by the nurse department not to reveal to the gastroenterologist team the regimen assigned. Participants will not be blinded to the intervention.
COLONOSCOPY AND BOWEL PREPARATION ASSESSMENT
Colonoscopies will be performed in the morning sessions, according to local standard operating procedures by board-certified gastroenterologists and supervised fellows in training. Assessment of the degree of bowel preparation will be made according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), with a total BBPS <6 or a BBPS <2 in any segment being defined as inappropriate.
Prior to enrolling the first participant, all endoscopists at each participating site must complete a formal BBPS calibration exercise. This consists of the independent scoring of a standardised set of colonoscopy video recordings with pre-established reference scores, provided by the coordinating centre. Certification requires a weighted kappa coefficient of ≥0.70 relative to the reference scores. Endoscopists who do not meet this threshold must undergo additional training and repeat the exercise before enrolling participants.
To ensure complete outcome data, participants who do not attend their scheduled colonoscopy will be contacted to document the reason. If non-attendance is unrelated to bowel preparation, the procedure may be rescheduled using the originally assigned regimen to preserve study allocation and limit dropouts.
STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Sample size was calculated based on the following assumptions. The expected adequacy rate in the control arm (standard 2L split-dose PEG) was set at 70%, consistent with the BBPS distribution reported by Gow-Lee et al. (2024) in 732 cirrhotic patients (mean BBPS 7.3 ± 1.8), from which an adequacy rate of approximately 70-72% can be derived. This estimate is further supported by Anam et al. (2016), who reported inadequate preparation in 48% of cirrhotic patients using standard regimens.
The expected adequacy rate in the intervention arm (split-dose 2L PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + 3-day low-fibre diet) was set at 87.5%, corresponding to an absolute improvement of 17.5 percentage points (25% relative improvement). This assumption is grounded in three independent lines of evidence: (1) in patients with chronic constipation - the closest available model for cirrhosis-related dysmotility - randomized evidence supports the inclusion of bisacodyl as an adjunct to bowel preparation regimens, providing a mechanistic rationale for its use in populations with impaired intestinal motility; (2) the USMSTF 2025 consensus explicitly recommends the combination of split-dose 4L PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + extended low-fibre diet for patients at high risk of inadequate preparation, including those with cirrhosis, based on the principle that each component contributes additively to cleansing efficacy; (3) the delta of 17.5 percentage points is deliberately conservative relative to effect sizes observed in analogous high-risk populations (29 percentage points in constipated patients), reflecting the uncertainty inherent in extrapolating to a cirrhotic population for which no RCT data exist.
Assuming a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and 90% statistical power, 113 patients per arm are required. After adjustment for an anticipated 10% dropout rate - a total of 252 patients (126 per arm) will be enrolled.
Descriptive statistics will be presented as mean (standard deviation), median (interquartile range), or proportions as appropriate. The primary analysis will be conducted using a modified intention-to-treat approach, including all randomized patients who initiated bowel preparation and underwent colonoscopy with bowel preparation assessment, with additional per-protocol analyses performed as sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the findings. The primary outcome will be compared between groups using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for pre-specified covariates including study centre and cirrhosis severity variables. Continuous variables will be analyzed using unpaired t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test as appropriate, and categorical variables using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Pre-specified secondary analyses will include per-protocol analysis and subgroup analyses according to cirrhosis etiology, Child-Pugh class, MELD 3.0 score, and portal hypertension-related complications. Statistical significance will be defined as a two-sided p-value <0.05.
SAFETY MONITORING AND INTERIM SAFETY ANALYSIS
An interim safety analysis will be performed after approximately 50% of the planned sample has been enrolled. An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), composed of two gastroenterologists and one biostatistician not otherwise involved in the trial, will review serious adverse events and procedure-related complications in both study arms. Safety outcomes reviewed will include hepatic decompensation, severe hepatic encephalopathy, bowel preparation-related hospitalization, and procedure-related complications. The trial may be suspended pending DSMB review if predefined safety thresholds are exceeded or if a significant between-group difference in serious adverse events is identified. The DSMB will also evaluate participant dropout rates and overall study safety throughout the trial.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
This study aims to generate prospective evidence supporting optimized bowel preparation strategies for cirrhotic patients undergoing colonoscopy.
- Conditions
- Cirrhosis, Bowel Preparation
- Being tested
- 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet, 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet
- Keywords
- Inadequate bowel preparation, Cirrhosis
- Medical subject headings
- Fibrosis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre dietDrug
Also called Bisacodyl, Cleansia
2-L split-dose polyethylene glycol combined with 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before colonoscopy, a 3-day low-fibre diet, and clear liquids the day before colonoscopy
2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre dietDrug
Also called Cleansia
2-L split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation combined with a 1-day low-fibre diet and clear liquids the afternoon before colonoscopy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Regimen A | Active comparator | 2-L split-dose PEG + 1-day low-fibre diet + clear liquids on the afternoon before colonoscopy Receives: Drug: 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet |
| Regimen B | Experimental | 2-L split-dose PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + 3-day low fibre diet + clear liquids on the day before colonoscopy Receives: Drug: 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Adequate bowel preparation
Proportion of participants with adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) total score of 6 or higher, with a score of at least 2 in each colonic segment. The BBPS ranges from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating better bowel cleansing.
Measured: Periprocedural
Secondary outcomes (11)
Total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score
Mean total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score. The BBPS ranges from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating better bowel cleansing.
Measured: Periprocedural
Polyp detection rate
Proportion of colonoscopies in which at least one colorectal polyp is detected.
Measured: Periprocedural
Adenoma detection rate
Proportion of colonoscopies in which at least one histologically confirmed adenoma is detected.
Measured: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Advanced adenoma detection rate
Proportion of colonoscopies with detection of at least one advanced adenoma, defined as adenoma ≥ 10 mm, villous histology or high-grade dysplasia.
Measured: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Colorectal cancer detection rate
Proportion of colonoscopies with detection of histologically confirmed colorectal adenocarcinoma.
Measured: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Mean number of polyps per colonoscopy
Measured: Periprocedural
Mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy
Mean number of histologically confirmed adenomas detected per colonoscopy.
Measured: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Cecal intubation rate
Proportion of colonoscopies in which successful cecal intubation is achieved.
Measured: Periprocedural
Adherence to the assigned bowel preparation regimen
Participant-reported completion of the assigned bowel preparation regimen assessed using a study-specific pre-procedure questionnaire, recorded as a dichotomous variable (yes/no).
Measured: Periprocedural
Willingness to repeat the assigned bowel preparation regimen
Participant-reported willingness to repeat the same bowel preparation regimen in the future, assessed using a study-specific pre-procedure questionnaire, recorded as a dichotomous variable (yes/no).
Measured: Periprocedural
Symptom burden during bowel preparation regimen
Participant-reported severity of fatigue, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain or cramping, sleep disturbance due to bowel movements, and headache during bowel preparation regimen, assessed using a study-specific pre-procedure questionnaire. Each symptom will be rated on a 5-point ordinal scale (None, Mild, Moderate, Severe, Very severe). Higher categories indicate greater symptom severity.
Measured: Periprocedural
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Jun 2026
- Study start1 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Aug 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Oct 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for CirrhosisStudies 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 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 252 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta Delgada
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Nadine Amaral, Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta Delgada
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07668778
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1640/CES-HDESPD/2026
- Acronym
- CIRRHOPREP
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 31 May 2026
- Last updated
- 25 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Jacobson BC, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Gross SA, May FP, Patel SG, Shaukat A, Robertson DJ. Optimizing Bowel Preparation Quality for Colonoscopy: Consensus Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2025 Apr;168(4):798-829. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2025.02.002. Epub 2025 Mar 4.
PubMed 40047732Jeschek P, Ferlitsch A, Salzl P, Heinze G, Gyori G, Reinhart K, Waldmann E, Britto-Arias M, Trauner M, Ferlitsch M. A greater proportion of liver transplant candidates have colorectal neoplasia than in the healthy screening population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 May;13(5):956-62. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.08.018. Epub 2014 Aug 20.
PubMed 25151257Kugelmas M, Zapata I, Tawil J, Pessetto A, Taglienti M, Kugelmas M. Liver Cirrhosis Increases the Risk of Developing Advanced Colon Polyps. Dig Dis Sci. 2023 Mar;68(3):931-938. doi: 10.1007/s10620-022-07561-1. Epub 2022 Jun 7.
PubMed 35670896Gundling F, Luxi M, Seidel H, Schepp W, Schmidt T. Small intestinal dysmotility in cirrhotic patients: correlation with severity of liver disease and cirrhosis-associated complications. Z Gastroenterol. 2021 Jun;59(6):540-550. doi: 10.1055/a-1162-0357. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
PubMed 32512591Theocharidou E, Dhar A, Patch D. Gastrointestinal Motility Disorders and Their Clinical Implications in Cirrhosis. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2017;2017:8270310. doi: 10.1155/2017/8270310. Epub 2017 May 11.
PubMed 28584525Clayton DB, Palmer WC, Robison SW, Heckman MG, Chimato NT, Harnois DM, Francis DL. Colonoscopy bowel preparation quality improvement for patients with decompensated cirrhosis undergoing evaluation for liver transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2016 Oct;30(10):1236-1241. doi: 10.1111/ctr.12809.
PubMed 27423053Gandhi K, Tofani C, Sokach C, Patel D, Kastenberg D, Daskalakis C. Patient Characteristics Associated With Quality of Colonoscopy Preparation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Mar;16(3):357-369.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.08.016. Epub 2017 Aug 18.
PubMed 28826680Hassan C, East J, Radaelli F, Spada C, Benamouzig R, Bisschops R, Bretthauer M, Dekker E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Ferlitsch M, Fuccio L, Awadie H, Gralnek I, Jover R, Kaminski MF, Pellise M, Triantafyllou K, Vanella G, Mangas-Sanjuan C, Frazzoni L, Van Hooft JE, Dumonceau JM. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2019. Endoscopy. 2019 Aug;51(8):775-794. doi: 10.1055/a-0959-0505. Epub 2019 Jul 11.
PubMed 31295746Sulz MC, Kroger A, Prakash M, Manser CN, Heinrich H, Misselwitz B. Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Bowel Preparation on Adenoma Detection: Early Adenomas Affected Stronger than Advanced Adenomas. PLoS One. 2016 Jun 3;11(6):e0154149. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154149. eCollection 2016.
PubMed 27257916Clark BT, Rustagi T, Laine L. What level of bowel prep quality requires early repeat colonoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preparation quality on adenoma detection rate. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov;109(11):1714-23; quiz 1724. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.232. Epub 2014 Aug 19.
PubMed 25135006Anam AK, Karia K, Jesudian AB, Bosworth BP. Cirrhotic Patients Have Worse Bowel Preparation at Screening Colonoscopy than Chronic Liver Disease Patients without Cirrhosis. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2016 Dec;6(4):297-302. doi: 10.1016/j.jceh.2016.08.009. Epub 2016 Aug 31.
PubMed 28003719Gow-Lee B, Gaumnitz J, Alsadhan M, Garg G, Amoafo L, Zhang Y, Fang J, Rodriguez E. Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension Worsen Bowel Preparation for Screening Colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2025 Jan 1;59(1):82-89. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001990.
PubMed 38567898
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of a Modified Bowel Preparation Regimen in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy: a Multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07668778
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CIRRHOPREP / 1640/CES-HDESPD/2026
- Conditions
- Cirrhosis, Bowel Preparation
- Keywords
- Inadequate bowel preparation, Cirrhosis
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 252 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta DelgadaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Aug 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Oct 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 25 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Inadequate bowel preparation compromises colonoscopy quality and diagnostic accuracy, and cirrhosis is a recognized independent predictor of poor bowel cleansing. However, no bowel preparation regimen has been prospectively validated or specifically tailored for cirrhotic patients.
This multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial will evaluate whether the addition of adjunctive measures as an intensified bowel preparation protocol improves bowel cleansing quality in adult patients with cirrhosis undergoing elective outpatient colonoscopy.
Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive either a standard bowel preparation protocol, consisting of a 2-litre split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) regimen combined with a one-day low-residue diet and clear liquids the afternoon before the procedure (control), or the same split-dose regimen with the assigned adjunctive measures: 15 mg bisacodyl, a 3-day low-residue diet, and clear liquids the day before colonoscopy (intervention).
The primary outcome is the proportion of patients achieving adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) total score ≥6 with no individual segment score <2. Secondary outcomes include polyp, adenoma, advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer detection rates, caecal intubation rate, patient compliance, tolerability, and adverse events. Pre-specified subgroup analyses will evaluate the influence of etiology and severity of cirrhosis and portal hypertension complications.
By addressing a critical and unmet clinical need, this trial aims to generate high-quality evidence to optimize bowel preparation strategies in patients with cirrhosis, improve colonoscopy quality, and ultimately enhance colorectal cancer screening outcomes in this vulnerable population.
Detailed description
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
Optimal diagnostic yield in colonoscopy is critically dependent on the quality of bowel preparation. Inadequate bowel preparation, observed in up to 25% of colonoscopies, adversely impacts procedural performance and diagnostic accuracy, with significantly reduced detection rates of adenomas and advanced adenomas, increased risk of undetected colorectal cancer, longer procedure times, and need for repeat colonoscopy.
Cirrhosis has been consistently identified as an independent predictor of inadequate bowel preparation, with studies reporting suboptimal cleansing in 29.8-49% of cirrhotic patients undergoing colonoscopy. Proposed mechanisms include impaired gastrointestinal motility related to autonomic dysfunction, metabolic derangements, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, and increased bacterial translocation, serving as a potential trigger for several complications associated with chronic liver disease.
Suboptimal bowel preparation may be particularly detrimental in patients with cirrhosis as chronic liver diseases may place patients at increased risk of colorectal cancer, making adequate bowel preparation essential to maximize the efficacy of screening with colonoscopy.
Studies that have reported on modified strategies for individuals with previous inadequate bowel preparation include prolonged low-fibre diets, the addition of promotility agents and/or the use of high-volume bowel preparation regimens. Recently, the US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) developed a consensus statement addressing bowel preparation regimens for individuals at high risk for inadequate bowel preparation, suggesting a split-dose high volume PEG formulation plus 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before the colonoscopy, along with a low-fibre diet 2 to 3 days before colonoscopy, changing to clear-liquid diet the day before colonoscopy.
To date, no randomized controlled trials have established a superior or specifically tailored bowel preparation regimen for patients with cirrhosis. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate whether an intensified bowel preparation protocol improves bowel cleansing quality in adult patients with cirrhosis undergoing colonoscopy.
STUDY DESIGN, RANDOMIZATION AND BLINDING
This is a multicentre prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial conducted at the endoscopy unit of the Gastroenterology Department of Portuguese centers. The coordinator centre is Gastroenterology Department of the Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo of Ponta Delgada. This trial was designed with the participation of four centres in Portugal. The addition of new participating sites during the recruitment period is permitted if it occurs before 50% of the total planned sample has been enrolled.
A total of 252 participants will be enrolled and randomized to one of two arms: control group (regimen A) will receive the standard bowel preparation without any additional interventions (2-L PEG regimen combined with a one-day low-fibre diet and transition to clear liquids the afternoon before colonoscopy), whereas the intervention group (regimen B) will receive the same 2-L PEG regimen in combination with the assigned adjunctive measures: (1) 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before the colonoscopy, (2) follow a 3-day low-fibre diet before the procedure and (3) clear liquids for the entire day before colonoscopy.
Randomization will be performed centrally using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) in a 1:1 allocation ratio. Data entry will be performed online through REDCap.
Blinding of the endoscopist will be strictly enforced. Before entering the endoscopy suite, the patient will be instructed by the nurse department not to reveal to the gastroenterologist team the regimen assigned. Participants will not be blinded to the intervention.
COLONOSCOPY AND BOWEL PREPARATION ASSESSMENT
Colonoscopies will be performed in the morning sessions, according to local standard operating procedures by board-certified gastroenterologists and supervised fellows in training. Assessment of the degree of bowel preparation will be made according to the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), with a total BBPS <6 or a BBPS <2 in any segment being defined as inappropriate.
Prior to enrolling the first participant, all endoscopists at each participating site must complete a formal BBPS calibration exercise. This consists of the independent scoring of a standardised set of colonoscopy video recordings with pre-established reference scores, provided by the coordinating centre. Certification requires a weighted kappa coefficient of ≥0.70 relative to the reference scores. Endoscopists who do not meet this threshold must undergo additional training and repeat the exercise before enrolling participants.
To ensure complete outcome data, participants who do not attend their scheduled colonoscopy will be contacted to document the reason. If non-attendance is unrelated to bowel preparation, the procedure may be rescheduled using the originally assigned regimen to preserve study allocation and limit dropouts.
STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Sample size was calculated based on the following assumptions. The expected adequacy rate in the control arm (standard 2L split-dose PEG) was set at 70%, consistent with the BBPS distribution reported by Gow-Lee et al. (2024) in 732 cirrhotic patients (mean BBPS 7.3 ± 1.8), from which an adequacy rate of approximately 70-72% can be derived. This estimate is further supported by Anam et al. (2016), who reported inadequate preparation in 48% of cirrhotic patients using standard regimens.
The expected adequacy rate in the intervention arm (split-dose 2L PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + 3-day low-fibre diet) was set at 87.5%, corresponding to an absolute improvement of 17.5 percentage points (25% relative improvement). This assumption is grounded in three independent lines of evidence: (1) in patients with chronic constipation - the closest available model for cirrhosis-related dysmotility - randomized evidence supports the inclusion of bisacodyl as an adjunct to bowel preparation regimens, providing a mechanistic rationale for its use in populations with impaired intestinal motility; (2) the USMSTF 2025 consensus explicitly recommends the combination of split-dose 4L PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + extended low-fibre diet for patients at high risk of inadequate preparation, including those with cirrhosis, based on the principle that each component contributes additively to cleansing efficacy; (3) the delta of 17.5 percentage points is deliberately conservative relative to effect sizes observed in analogous high-risk populations (29 percentage points in constipated patients), reflecting the uncertainty inherent in extrapolating to a cirrhotic population for which no RCT data exist.
Assuming a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and 90% statistical power, 113 patients per arm are required. After adjustment for an anticipated 10% dropout rate - a total of 252 patients (126 per arm) will be enrolled.
Descriptive statistics will be presented as mean (standard deviation), median (interquartile range), or proportions as appropriate. The primary analysis will be conducted using a modified intention-to-treat approach, including all randomized patients who initiated bowel preparation and underwent colonoscopy with bowel preparation assessment, with additional per-protocol analyses performed as sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the findings. The primary outcome will be compared between groups using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for pre-specified covariates including study centre and cirrhosis severity variables. Continuous variables will be analyzed using unpaired t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test as appropriate, and categorical variables using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Pre-specified secondary analyses will include per-protocol analysis and subgroup analyses according to cirrhosis etiology, Child-Pugh class, MELD 3.0 score, and portal hypertension-related complications. Statistical significance will be defined as a two-sided p-value <0.05.
SAFETY MONITORING AND INTERIM SAFETY ANALYSIS
An interim safety analysis will be performed after approximately 50% of the planned sample has been enrolled. An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), composed of two gastroenterologists and one biostatistician not otherwise involved in the trial, will review serious adverse events and procedure-related complications in both study arms. Safety outcomes reviewed will include hepatic decompensation, severe hepatic encephalopathy, bowel preparation-related hospitalization, and procedure-related complications. The trial may be suspended pending DSMB review if predefined safety thresholds are exceeded or if a significant between-group difference in serious adverse events is identified. The DSMB will also evaluate participant dropout rates and overall study safety throughout the trial.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
This study aims to generate prospective evidence supporting optimized bowel preparation strategies for cirrhotic patients undergoing colonoscopy.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Regimen A | Active comparator | Drug: 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet2-L split-dose PEG + 1-day low-fibre diet + clear liquids on the afternoon before colonoscopy |
| Regimen B | Experimental | Drug: 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet2-L split-dose PEG + 15 mg bisacodyl + 3-day low fibre diet + clear liquids on the day before colonoscopy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Established diagnosis of cirrhosis, scheduled for elective outpatient total colonoscopy
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Ability to follow verbal and written instructions in Portuguese
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Urgent procedures
- Colonoscopies not intended to reach the caecum
- History of any colonic surgery
- Absolute contraindication to bowel preparation or colonoscopy
- Active hepatic encephalopathy (West Haven grade ≥2) at the time of enrolment
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre dietAlso: Bisacodyl, Cleansia2-L split-dose polyethylene glycol combined with 15 mg bisacodyl the afternoon before colonoscopy, a 3-day low-fibre diet, and clear liquids the day before colonoscopy | Drug | Regimen B |
| 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre dietAlso: Cleansia2-L split-dose polyethylene glycol bowel preparation combined with a 1-day low-fibre diet and clear liquids the afternoon before colonoscopy | Drug | Regimen A |
Primary outcome
Adequate bowel preparation
Time frame: Periprocedural
Proportion of participants with adequate bowel preparation, defined as a Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) total score of 6 or higher, with a score of at least 2 in each colonic segment. The BBPS ranges from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating better bowel cleansing.
11 secondary outcomes
Total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score
Time frame: Periprocedural
Polyp detection rate
Time frame: Periprocedural
Adenoma detection rate
Time frame: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Advanced adenoma detection rate
Time frame: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Colorectal cancer detection rate
Time frame: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Mean number of polyps per colonoscopy
Time frame: Periprocedural
Mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy
Time frame: Up to 30 days after colonoscopy
Cecal intubation rate
Time frame: Periprocedural
Adherence to the assigned bowel preparation regimen
Time frame: Periprocedural
Willingness to repeat the assigned bowel preparation regimen
Time frame: Periprocedural
Symptom burden during bowel preparation regimen
Time frame: Periprocedural
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jun 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 40047732Jacobson BC, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Gross SA, May FP, Patel SG, Shaukat A, Robertson DJ. Optimizing Bowel Preparation Quality for Colonoscopy: Consensus Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2025 Apr;168(4):798-829. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2025.02.002. Epub 2025 Mar 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 25151257Jeschek P, Ferlitsch A, Salzl P, Heinze G, Gyori G, Reinhart K, Waldmann E, Britto-Arias M, Trauner M, Ferlitsch M. A greater proportion of liver transplant candidates have colorectal neoplasia than in the healthy screening population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 May;13(5):956-62. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.08.018. Epub 2014 Aug 20.
- Results publication: PubMed 35670896Kugelmas M, Zapata I, Tawil J, Pessetto A, Taglienti M, Kugelmas M. Liver Cirrhosis Increases the Risk of Developing Advanced Colon Polyps. Dig Dis Sci. 2023 Mar;68(3):931-938. doi: 10.1007/s10620-022-07561-1. Epub 2022 Jun 7.
- Results publication: PubMed 32512591Gundling F, Luxi M, Seidel H, Schepp W, Schmidt T. Small intestinal dysmotility in cirrhotic patients: correlation with severity of liver disease and cirrhosis-associated complications. Z Gastroenterol. 2021 Jun;59(6):540-550. doi: 10.1055/a-1162-0357. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
- Results publication: PubMed 28584525Theocharidou E, Dhar A, Patch D. Gastrointestinal Motility Disorders and Their Clinical Implications in Cirrhosis. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2017;2017:8270310. doi: 10.1155/2017/8270310. Epub 2017 May 11.
- Results publication: PubMed 27423053Clayton DB, Palmer WC, Robison SW, Heckman MG, Chimato NT, Harnois DM, Francis DL. Colonoscopy bowel preparation quality improvement for patients with decompensated cirrhosis undergoing evaluation for liver transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2016 Oct;30(10):1236-1241. doi: 10.1111/ctr.12809.
- Results publication: PubMed 28826680Gandhi K, Tofani C, Sokach C, Patel D, Kastenberg D, Daskalakis C. Patient Characteristics Associated With Quality of Colonoscopy Preparation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Mar;16(3):357-369.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.08.016. Epub 2017 Aug 18.
- Results publication: PubMed 31295746Hassan C, East J, Radaelli F, Spada C, Benamouzig R, Bisschops R, Bretthauer M, Dekker E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Ferlitsch M, Fuccio L, Awadie H, Gralnek I, Jover R, Kaminski MF, Pellise M, Triantafyllou K, Vanella G, Mangas-Sanjuan C, Frazzoni L, Van Hooft JE, Dumonceau JM. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2019. Endoscopy. 2019 Aug;51(8):775-794. doi: 10.1055/a-0959-0505. Epub 2019 Jul 11.
- Results publication: PubMed 27257916Sulz MC, Kroger A, Prakash M, Manser CN, Heinrich H, Misselwitz B. Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Bowel Preparation on Adenoma Detection: Early Adenomas Affected Stronger than Advanced Adenomas. PLoS One. 2016 Jun 3;11(6):e0154149. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154149. eCollection 2016.
- Results publication: PubMed 25135006Clark BT, Rustagi T, Laine L. What level of bowel prep quality requires early repeat colonoscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preparation quality on adenoma detection rate. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov;109(11):1714-23; quiz 1724. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.232. Epub 2014 Aug 19.
- Results publication: PubMed 28003719Anam AK, Karia K, Jesudian AB, Bosworth BP. Cirrhotic Patients Have Worse Bowel Preparation at Screening Colonoscopy than Chronic Liver Disease Patients without Cirrhosis. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2016 Dec;6(4):297-302. doi: 10.1016/j.jceh.2016.08.009. Epub 2016 Aug 31.
- Results publication: PubMed 38567898Gow-Lee B, Gaumnitz J, Alsadhan M, Garg G, Amoafo L, Zhang Y, Fang J, Rodriguez E. Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension Worsen Bowel Preparation for Screening Colonoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2025 Jan 1;59(1):82-89. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001990.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Cirrhosis
RecruitingObservational study
The Value of Spleen Thickness and Spleen Diameter for Gastroesophageal Varices Diagnosis in Compensated Cirrhosis
Liver Cirrhosis, Gastroesophageal Varices
Recruiting
Optimal Treatment Strategy for Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis
Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis, Paracentesis
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Study of Elafibranor in Patients With Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC)
Primary Biliary Cirrhosis
Recruiting
CirrhosisRx CDS System
Cirrhosis, Decision Support Systems, Clinical
RecruitingPhase 3
Trial to Evaluate ALN-CIDEB in Adults With Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD)
Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease, MASLD
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.
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing 2-L PEG plus bisacodyl plus 3-day low fibre diet and 2-L PEG plus 1-day low fibre diet in people with Cirrhosis and Bowel Preparation, run by Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo de Ponta Delgada at 4 sites in Portugal.
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 3 inclusion and 8 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in Portugal. 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.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Each site lists its own contact: choose the nearest one under Trial locations. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Adequate bowel preparation (time frame: Periprocedural). 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 NCT07668778, which also lists 12 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 25 Jun 2026.