Background/Aims Adequate bowel preparation is important for successful colonoscopy. We aimed to evaluate the clinical feasibility and effectiveness of abdominal vibration stimulation in bowel preparation before therapeutic colonoscopy. Methods A single center, prospective, randomized, investigator-blinded study was performed between January 2016 and December 2016. Patients for therapeutic colonoscopy were prospectively enrolled and assigned to either the vibrator group or walking group. Patients who refused to participate in this study as part of the experimental group consented to register in the control group instead. During the preparation period, patients assigned to the walking group walked ≥3,000 steps, whereas those assigned to the vibrator group received abdominal vibrator stimulation and restricted walking. All patients received the same colon cleansing regimen: 4-L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution. Results Three hundred patients who received PEG solution for therapeutic colonoscopy were finally enrolled in this study (n=100 per group). Bowel cleansing with abdominal vibration stimulation showed almost similar results to that with walking exercise (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score for the entire colon: vibrator vs walking vs control, 7.38±1.55 vs 7.39±1.55 vs 6.17±1.15, p<0.001). There were no significant differences between the vibrator group and walking group regarding instances of diarrhea after taking PEG, time to first diarrhea after taking PEG, total procedure time, and patient satisfaction. Conclusions This study indicates that, compared with conventional walking exercise, abdominal vibration stimulation achieved similar rates of bowel cleansing adequacy and colonoscopy success without compromising safety or patient satisfaction.

The long-term effect of Helicobacter pylori eradication on metachronous gastric neoplasm prevention after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of gastric adenoma is unclear. This study included patients with confirmed H. pylori infection after ESD with curative resection for gastric adenoma. Patients were divided based on the success of H. pylori eradication treatment into two groups: eradication and non-eradication. Patients with any newly detected lesion within 1 year after ESD and recurrence at the ESD site were excluded from the analysis. Further, 1:1 propensity score matching was also performed to eliminate baseline differences between the two groups. H. pylori eradication treatment was administered to 673 patients after ESD (163 in the successful eradication group and 510 in the non-eradication group). During the median follow-up periods of 25 and 39 months in the eradication and non-eradication groups, metachronous gastric neoplasm was identified in 6 (3.7%) and 22 patients (4.3%), respectively. Adjusted Cox analysis revealed that H. pylori eradication was not associated with increased risk of metachronous gastric neoplasm after ESD. Kaplan–Meier analysis in the matched population yielded similar findings (p = 0.546). H. pylori eradication treatment was not associated with metachronous gastric neoplasm after ESD with curative resection for gastric adenoma.