ArticlePloS one2015
What Kind of Capsule Endoscope Is Suitable for a Controllable Self-Propelling Capsule Endoscope? Experimental Study Using a Porcine Stomach Model for Clinical Application (with Videos).
Article in PloS one, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety, efficacy, and maneuverability of a self-propelled capsule endoscope for observation of the human gastrointestinal tract.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe have been developing the Self-Propelling Capsule Endoscope (SPCE) that allows for controllability from outside of the body and real-time observation. What kind of capsule endoscope (CE) is suitable for a controllable SPCE is unclear and a very critical point for clinical application. We compared observing ability of three kinds of SPCEs with different viewing angles and frame rates.
methodsEleven buttons were sewed in an excised porcine stomach. Four examiners controlled the SPCE using PillCamSB2, -ESO2, and -COLON2 (Given Imaging Ltd., Israel), for 10 minutes each with the aim of detecting as many buttons and examining them as closely as possible. The ability to find lesions was assessed based on the number of detected buttons. The SPCE-performance score (SPS) was used to evaluate the ability to examine the lesions in detail.
resultsThe SPCE-ESO2, -COLON2, and -SB2 detected 11 [interquartile range (IQR): 0], 10.5 (IQR, 0.5), and 8 (IQR, 1.0) buttons, respectively. The SPCE-ESO2 and -COLON2 had a significantly better ability to detect lesions than the -SB2 (p < 0.05). The SPCE-ESO2, -COLON2, and -SB2 had significantly different SPS values of 22 (IQR, 0), 16.5 (IQR, 1.5), and 14 (IQR, 1.0), respectively (p < 0.05 for all comparisons; SPCE-SB2 vs. -ESO2, -SB2 vs. -COLON2, and -ESO2 vs. -COLON2).
conclusionsPillCamESO2 is most suitable in different three CEs for SPCE for examining lesions in detail of the stomach.
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.