Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29767393›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2018

Small-Bowel Capsule Endoscopy in Clinical Practice: Has Anything Changed Over 13 Years?

Marco Soncini, Carlo Maria Girelli, Roberto de Franchis, Emanuele Rondonotti, SBCE Lombardia Study Group, On behalf AIGO, SIED and SIGE Lombardia

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Small Bowel Video Capsule Endoscopy Guidance in Practice: Expert Opinion Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Capsule Endoscopy: Pitfalls and Approaches to Overcome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Marco SonciniGastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Carlo Borromeo, Via Pio II, 3, 20153, Milan, Italy. soncini.marco@alice.it.ORCID 0000-0002-2745-1560
Carlo Maria GirelliGastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Hospital of Busto Arsizio, Busto Arsizio, Varese, Italy.
Roberto de FranchisUniversity of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Emanuele RondonottiGastroenterology Unit, Ospedale Valduce, Como, Italy.
SBCE Lombardia Study Group
On behalf AIGO, SIED and SIGE Lombardia

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Lombardia, one of the 20 Italian administrative Regions, small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) was introduced in 2001. In January 2011, the Regional Health Authorities established a reimbursement for outpatient SBCE.

aimTo prospectively record data on SBCE between 2011-2013 and compare them to similar data retrospectively collected from the same geographical area (covering the period 2001-2008) and published in 2008.

methodsConsecutive SBCEs performed between January 2011 and December 2013 in Lombardia were prospectively collected.

resultsIn 3 years, 3142 SBCEs were collected; the diagnostic yield (DY) and the overall complication rate were 48.4 and 0.9%, respectively. The main indication was suspected small-bowel bleeding (76.6% of patients); complete small-bowel inspection was achieved in 2796 (89.0%) patients. SBCE was performed as an outpatient procedure in 1945 patients (61.9%). A significant increase in the rate of patients undergoing SBCE for suspected small-bowel bleeding was observed from 2001-2008 to 2011-2013 (67.3 vs. 76.1%; p < 0.001). There was an increase in the number of complete small-bowel examinations (81.2 vs. 89.0%; p < 0.001) and of outpatient SBCEs (6.7 vs. 61.9%; p < 0.001). Conversely, both the retention rate (2.1 vs. 0.8%; p < 0.001) and the rate of patients undergoing SBCE for Crohn's disease (11.5 vs. 5.5%; p < 0.001) decreased significantly. The overall DY remained stable (50.6 vs. 48.4%; p = 0.089).

conclusionOur study shows that, over 13 years, the SBCE safety profile and completion rate significantly improved over time; a change in the spectrum of clinical indications was also observed.

Indexed as

RegistriesAgedAged, 80 and overCapsule EndoscopyCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntestine, SmallItalyMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsCapsule retentionDiagnostic yieldReimbursement policySmall-bowel capsule endoscopy

Identifiers

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.