ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2018
Diagnostic Benefit of Simultaneous Capsule Endoscopy Using Two Different Systems.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Study of MiroCam MC2000 and PillCam SB3 in Detecting Small Bowel Bleeding: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Crossover Study.Gut and liver · 2025Trial
- A novel capsule endoscopy for upper and mid-GI tract: the UMGI capsule.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Recent technological advances in video capsule endoscopy: a comprehensive review.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- The Optimal Timing for Using Capsule Endoscopy for Patients with Gastrointestinal Bleeding.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- Poor Quality of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Images Has a Significant Negative Effect in the Diagnosis of Small Bowel Malignancy.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2020Article
- The Usefulness of New-Generation Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Portal Hypertensive Enteropathy.Clinical endoscopy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsCapsule endoscopy (CE) is a noninvasive test for diagnosing small bowel disorders. However, several studies reported that the CE-based visualization is suboptimal. This study, the first to use two CEs simultaneously, aimed at evaluating the diagnostic ability of dual CE.
methodsDual CE procedures were prospectively conducted. All patients completed bowel cleansing 2 hours before examination. Subsequently, they simultaneously swallowed two capsules: MiroCam (IntroMedic, Seoul, Korea) and PillCam SB3 (Medtronic, Minneapolis, USA). We assessed the completeness and feasibility of small bowel examination and the detection rate of duodenal papilla and diagnostic yield.
resultsTwenty consecutive patients who underwent complete small bowel examination with dual CE were enrolled in the study. The mean time of small bowel passage was 245 ± 99 min. Dual CE examination increased the duodenal papilla detection rate to up to 75% (versus PillCam SB3 alone (
conclusionsIn this study, we found that dual CE enhances diagnostic accuracy and could increase the diagnostic power of existing CE systems using simply applicable methods. This trial is registered with KCT0002541.
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.