ArticleEndoscopy international open2015
Is virtual chromoendoscopy useful in the evaluation of subtle ulcerative small-bowel lesions detected by video capsule endoscopy?
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Virtual Chromoendoscopy in Capsule Endoscopy: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Evaluation of the Usefulness of Virtual Chromoendoscopy with Different Color Modes in the MiroCam® System for Characterization of Small Bowel Lesions.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Role of new endoscopic techniques in inflammatory bowel disease management: Has the change come?World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Capsule endoscopy of the small bowel.Annals of translational medicine · 2016Review
- Usefulness of virtual chromoendoscopy in the evaluation of subtle small bowel ulcerative lesions by endoscopists with no experience in videocapsule.Endoscopy international open · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe identification of subtle small-bowel mucosal lesions by video capsule endoscopy (VCE) can be challenging. Virtual chromoendoscopy techniques, based on narrowing the bandwidth of conventional white light endoscopic imaging (WLI), were developed to improve the analysis of mucosal patterns. However, data on the already-implemented Flexible spectral Imaging (or Fujinon Intelligent) Color Enhancement (FICE) software application in VCE are limited. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn evaluation of 250 difficult-to-interpret small-bowel ulcerative and 50 artifact lesions selected from 64 VCE recordings was conducted by four experienced VCE readers in two steps: initially as WLI, then with the addition of all available virtual chromoendoscopy pre-sets (FICE 1, 2, and 3 and Blue mode). The readers labeled them as real or false ulcerative lesions and rated the usefulness of each of the pre-sets.
resultsBetween the first (WLI-only) and second (virtual chromoendoscopy-aided) readings, in terms of accuracy there was a global 16.5 % (95 % confidence interval [95 %CI] 13.6 - 19.4 %) improvement (P < 0.001), derived from a 22 % [95 %CI 18.9 - 25.1 %] improvement in the evaluation of true ulcerative images (P < 0.001) and an 11 % (95 %CI 4.1 - 17.7 %) decrease in the evaluation of false ulcerative ones (P = 0.003). The FICE 1 and 2 pre-sets were rated as most useful.
conclusionThe application of virtual chromoendoscopy for VCE is useful to better categorize difficult-to-interpret small-bowel mucosal ulcerative lesions. However, care must be taken, and individual images should be evaluated only as part of a sequence in a recording because the technology can also mistakenly guide to the incorrect interpretation of artifacts as ulcerative lesions.
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.