ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2015
Predictive Factors for Endoscopic Visibility and Strategies for Pre-endoscopic Prokinetics Use in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Safety Before Upper Endoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Gastroenterology research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough current guideline recommends selective use of pre-endoscopic prokinetics to increase diagnostic yield in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) patients, no data to guide the use of these drugs are available.
aimsWe aimed to investigate predictive factors for endoscopic visibility and develop simple and useful strategies for pre-endoscopic prokinetics use in UGIB patients.
methodsA total of 220 consecutive patients who underwent upper endoscopy for suspicious UGIB were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to either a training or a validation set at a 2:1 ratio. Significant parameters on univariate analysis were subsequently tested by a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis.
resultsTime to endoscopy and nasogastric aspirate findings were independently related to endoscopic visibility. The CART analysis generated algorithms proposed sequential use of time to endoscopy (≤5.2 vs. >5.2 h) and nasogastric aspirate findings (red blood or coffee rounds vs. clear aspirate) for predicting endoscopic visibility. Prediction of unacceptable visibility in the validation set produced sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 75.8, 67.5, 65.8, and 77.1 %, respectively. Accurate prediction for visibility was identified in 52 of 73 patients (71.2 %).
conclusionsTime to endoscopy and nasogastric aspirate findings were independently related to endoscopic visibility in patients with UGIB. A decision-tree model incorporating these two variables may be useful for selecting UGIB patients who benefit from pre-endoscopic prokinetics use.
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.