ArticleEndoscopy international open2018
The diagnostic yield of open-access endoscopy of the upper gastrointestinal tract in the Netherlands.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Risk Prediction Models for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Systematic Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Feasibility and Early Experience with Pediatric Open Access Endoscopy: A Pilot Study.Pediatric reports · 2025Article
- Analysis between symptoms of the upper gastrointestinal tract and endoscopic findings of patients undergoing upper digestive endoscopy in a reference center in the interior of Maranhão, Brazil.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2024Observational
- The Swedish Standardized Course of Care-Diagnostic Efficacy in Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Patients with Clinically Suspected Gallstone Disease: A More Selective Ultrasound May Improve Treatment Related Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Appropriateness of Endoscopic Procedures: A Prospective, Multicenter Study.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Systematic review with meta-analysis: age-related malignancy detection rates at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Prevention of overuse: A view on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- An Unusual Case of Collagenous Gastritis: Incidental Finding in a Patient Presenting with Dysphagia.Case reports in gastrointestinal medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsSince the introduction of open-access esophago-gastroduodenoscopy (OAE) there is an increase in the total number of performed OAEs whilst the frequency of clinical relevant findings has decreased. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriate use and the diagnostic yield of OAE in the Netherlands and to determine which patient variables are able to predict a malignant finding. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective chart review of all referrals for diagnostic OAE between October 2012 and October 2016 at the Northwest Clinics was performed. The indications were recorded from the referral letter and were classified as "appropriate" or "inappropriate" according to the NHG guideline. Logistic regression was used to detect significant predictive variables for a malignancy.
resultsA total of 2006 patients were included, of whom 59.6 % had an 'appropriate' referral indication. The diagnostic yield of finding a clinical relevant finding was significantly higher for OAEs with an "appropriate" referral indication. Independent risk factors for malignancy were alarm symptoms, age and male gender with a combined AUC of 0.868.
conclusionsOnly 3.8 % of the malignancies would be missed by strict adherence to the guideline. This indicates that the open-access system in the Netherlands works well. Further improvement of the system can be achieved by only accepting appropriate indications for OAE and by treating patients under the age of 40 without OAE. We showed that a risk-prediction model based on the variables age, alarm symptoms and male gender is a good predictor of malignant finding.
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.