Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28839833›Full record

ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2016

How does tolerability of double balloon enteroscopy compare to other forms of endoscopy?

Andrew J Irvine, David S Sanders, Andrew Hopper, Matthew Kurien, Reena Sidhu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Controversies in … capsule endoscopy.Frontline gastroenterology · 2020
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Capsule endoscopy of the small bowel.Annals of translational medicine · 2016
    Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Andrew J IrvineDepartment of Gastroenterology & Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
David S SandersDepartment of Gastroenterology & Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Andrew HopperDepartment of Gastroenterology & Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Matthew KurienDepartment of Gastroenterology & Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Reena SidhuDepartment of Gastroenterology & Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsGastrointestinal endoscopy can be difficult for patients to tolerate. Studies on endoscopic tolerability mainly focus on gastroscopy or colonoscopy with a paucity of data on double balloon enteroscopy (DBE). We aimed to prospectively evaluate tolerability in patients undergoing several forms of endoscopy including DBE.

methodsConsecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, gastroscopy, endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP), capsule endoscopy (CE) and DBE were prospectively recruited. A questionnaire recorded demographics, procedural data, patient tolerability (pain, discomfort and distress recorded on numerical rating scales) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

results956 patients were recruited (512 women; median age 57 years). The median pain score for DBE was poor with a score of 5 compared with 1 and 0 for oesophagogastroduodenoscopy and ERCP, respectively (p<0.001). Colonoscopy and retrograde DBE scores were not dissimilar. CE was well tolerated with a median pain score of 0. Patients with DBE required significantly higher doses of sedation and analgesia than other patients. The HADS Anxiety Score was also associated with poorer tolerability.

conclusionsDBE is poorly tolerated when compared with other forms of endoscopy despite higher doses of sedation. Increasing demand to improve tolerability of DBE in the UK may be addressed with the use of propofol.

Indexed as

ENDOSCOPIC PROCEDURESENTEROSCOPY

Identifiers

PMID28839833
PMCPMC5369540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.