Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26904544›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2016

Video Capsule Endoscopy: A Tool for the Assessment of Small Bowel Transit Time.

Reza A Hejazi, Mohammad Bashashati, Mohammed Saadi, Zuber D Mulla, Irene Sarosiek, Richard W McCallum, Marc J Zuckerman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Variation in small bowel transit time on capsule endoscopy.Annals of translational medicine · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Reza A HejaziDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Jacksonville, FL , USA.
Mohammad BashashatiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center , El Paso, TX , USA.
Mohammed SaadiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Temple University , Philadelphia, PA , USA.
Zuber D MullaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, TX, USA; Department of Public Health, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Irene SarosiekDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center , El Paso, TX , USA.
Richard W McCallumDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center , El Paso, TX , USA.
Marc J ZuckermanDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center , El Paso, TX , USA.
Texas Tech University · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USTemple University · USTexas Tech University Health Sciences Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeVideo capsule endoscopy (VCE) is a procedure that uses a wireless camera to take pictures of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. A wireless motility capsule (WMC) of a similar size has been developed, which measures pH, pressure, and temperature and can be used to assess regional and total GI transit times. VCE could also potentially be used as a tool for measuring small bowel transit time (SBTT).

methodsThis study was designed to obtain SBTT from VCE and compare it with historical data generated by WMC. Gastric transit time (GTT) was also measured. Patients were included if the indication for VCE was either iron deficiency anemia (IDA) or overt obscure GI bleed (OOGIB), and they did not have any known motility disorder. Results from VCE were also compared in diabetic vs. non-diabetic patients.

resultsThere were a total of 147 VCE studies performed, including 42 for OOGIB and 105 for IDA. Median GTT and SBTT were 0.3 and 3.6 h, respectively. The overall median GTT and SBTT were 0.3 and 3.6 h, respectively, in the IDA group compared with 0.3 and 3.4 h in the OOGIB group. When compared with WMC, the GTT and SBTT were significantly faster in both groups (GTT: 3.6 h and SBTT: 4.6 h). The median GTT and SBTT were not significantly different in diabetics vs. non-diabetics [GTT: 17.5 vs. 18.0 min (P = 0.86) and SBTT: 3.9 h (237 min) vs. 3.8 h (230 min), respectively (P = 0.90)].

conclusionSBTT as measured using VCE is not significantly different in OOGIB compared with IDA. Both GTT and SBTT are significantly faster as assessed by VCE, which is initiated in the fasting state, compared with WMC measurement, which is initiated after a standard meal. In summary, VCE could potentially be used for measuring SBTT in the fasting state.

Indexed as

small intestine transit timevideo capsule endoscopywireless motility capsule

Identifiers

PMID26904544
PMCPMC4748027
OpenAlexW2263876012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.