Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Utility of single and double balloon endoscopy in patients with difficult colonoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Best Approach for Incomplete Colonoscopy: Colon Capsule Endoscopy or Repeat Conventional Colonoscopy?GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of a machine learning algorithm-based predictive model for difficult colonoscopy insertion.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of a novel rigidizing overtube in completing difficult colonoscopies and for challenging colorectal polyp resection.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- The Evolution of Device-Assisted Enteroscopy: From Sonde Enteroscopy to Motorized Spiral Enteroscopy.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Balloon-Assisted Colonoscopy after Incomplete Conventional Colonoscopy-Experience from Two European Centres with A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Efficacy and suitable indication of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using a balloon-assisted endoscope.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2020Article
- When Colonoscopy Fails… Refer, Repeat, and Succeed.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Double-Balloon Endoscopy after Incomplete Colonoscopy and Its Comparison with Computed Tomography Colonography.Clinical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Development and validation of an algorithm to complete colonoscopy using standard endoscopes in patients with prior incomplete colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2017Article
- Approach to Incomplete Colonoscopy: New Techniques and Technologies.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017Article
- The incidence of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: a retrospective long-term cohort study using a colonoscopy database.International journal of colorectal disease · 2017Article
- A hydraulically driven colonoscope.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- The role of single-balloon colonoscopy for patients with previous incomplete standard colonoscopy: Is it worth doing it?Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Alternatives to Incomplete Colonoscopy.Current gastroenterology reports · 2015Review
- Current status of single-balloon enteroscopy: Insertability and clinical applications.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2015Review
- ANALYSIS OF DOUBLE BALLOON ENTEROSCOPY: INDICATIONS, FINDINGS, THERAPEUTIC AND COMPLICATIONS.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the utility of single-balloon colonoscopy (SBC) or double-balloon colonoscopy (DBC) for difficult colonoscopies.
methodsBetween August 2008 and June 2010, patients in whom total colonoscopy failed within 30 min of insertion were assigned randomly to undergo either SBC or DBC. No sedatives were used. After the endoscopy, all patients were asked to evaluate pain during the procedure on a 10-point analog scale (1 = no pain; 10 = worst imaginable pain) with a questionnaire. The study outcomes were the cecal intubation rate and time, endoscopic findings, complications, and pain score.
resultsThe SBC and DBC groups included 11 and 10 patients, respectively. All but one SBC patient achieved total colonoscopy successfully. The cecal intubation times were 18 min (range: 10-85 min) and 12.8 min (range: 9.5-42 min) in the SBC and DBC groups, respectively (P = 0.17). No difference was observed in the prevalence of colon polyps between the SBC and DBC groups (45% vs 30%, P = 0.66). SBC showed advanced colon cancer in the ascending colon, which was inaccessible using conventional colonoscopy. The respective pain scores were 5 (1-10) [median (range)] and 5 (1-6) in the SBC and DBC groups (P = 0.64). No complications were noted in any patient.
conclusionThe utility of single- and double-balloon endoscopy for colonoscopy seems comparable in patients with incomplete colonoscopy using a conventional colonoscope.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.