The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in patients on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists
Abstract
Background and aims We aimed to assess the quality of bowel preparation in a matched cohort of patients actively using and not using glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in a large health system in the United States. Methods We performed a retrospective review of adult patients undergoing colonoscopy in 22 endoscopy units across 18 sites in the United States. Results Our cohort comprised 6235 patients (3344 case patients and 2891 control patients). Baseline variables causing suboptimal bowel preparation were setting of procedure (inpatient), sex (male), body mass index (higher), type 2 diabetes mellitus, inflammatory bowel disease, opioid medications, heart failure, and cirrhosis. Total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale was significantly higher in control patients even after controlling for the mentioned variables (P < .01). Case patients were significantly more likely to meet the definition of inadequate bowel preparation. There was no significant difference between different classes of GLP-1 RAs. Conclusions Patients using GLP-1 RAs are more likely to have inadequate bowel preparation during colonoscopy, even accounting for other comorbidities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a 2025 meta-analysis of 23 observational studies consisting of 262,018 patients, a clear liquid diet on the day prior to the procedure significantly reduced the risk of RGV compared with standard fasting (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P < .001; I2 = 0%).
“In a 2025 meta-analysis of 23 observational studies consisting of 262 018 patients, a clear liquid diet on the day prior to the procedure significantly reduced the risk of RGV compared with standard fasting (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P < .001; I2 = 0%).15”
From Holding vs Continuing GLP-1/GIP Agonists Before Upper Endoscopy (2026) · cites this paper as [15]
Citations
Cites
Trends in glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist use, 2014 to 2022.
Watanabe, J. H., Kwon, J., Nan, B., & Reikes, A. (2024) · Journal of the American Pharmacists Association · doi:10.1016/j.japh.2023.10.002 · Cited by 216
Ushakumari, D. S., & Sladen, R. N. (2024) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000004776 · Cited by 139
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Shahini, 2023, Factors affecting the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in hard-to-prepare patients: evidence from the literature, World J Gastroenterol, 29, 1685, 10.3748/wjg.v29.i11.1685 · DOI
- Lai, 2009, The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research, Gastrointest Endosc, 69, 620, 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057 · DOI
- Agrawal, 2017, Inadequate bowel preparation rates should be considered before screening colonoscopy is recommended, Gastrointest Endosc, 86, 1188, 10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.002 · DOI
- Johnson, 2014, Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: recommendations from the U.S. multi-society task force on colorectal cancer, Gastrointest Endosc, 80, 543, 10.1016/j.gie.2014.08.002 · DOI
- Yao, 2024, Effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on bowel preparation for colonoscopy, Am J Gastroenterol, 119, 1154, 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002564 · DOI
- Tong, 2023, Impact of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin on bowel cleaning and gastrointestinal symptoms in type 2 diabetes, Front Pharmacol, 14, 10.3389/fphar.2023.1176206 · DOI
- Sharma, 2017, Evaluation of the effect of GLP-1 agonists on quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in patients with diabetes, Practical Diabetes, 34, 167, 10.1002/pdi.2110 · DOI
- Chirila, 2023, Preparing for colonoscopy in people with diabetes: a review with suggestions for clinical practice, J Can Assoc Gastroenterol, 6, 26
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Holding vs Continuing GLP-1/GIP Agonists Before Upper Endoscopy
Ahmad, A. I., Garg, S., Jacobs, J., Ansari, Z., Al-Din, T. J., Almomani, A., Valencia, S., Vargo, J., Chatterjee, A., Siddiki, H., et al. (2026) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2026.0027 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Gala, K., Tome, J., Krall, M., Tian, D., League, J. B., Vargas, E. J., Pardi, D. S., Johnson, A. M., & Coelho-Prabhu, N.
- Affiliations
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Venue
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-05
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1068-1072.e1
- ISSN
- 0016-5107 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4404437357
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7
- FWCI
- 2.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- bowel preparation, colonoscopy, GLP-1 receptor agonists, inadequate bowel preparation, Boston Bowel Preparation Scale, type 2 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, opioid use, body mass index, comorbidities
- MeSH terms
- Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, Adult, Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Cathartics, Colonoscopy, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, United States, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Case-Control Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
