ArticleSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
Initial experience of video capsule endoscopy at a tertiary center in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Indications and Outcomes of Video Capsule Endoscopy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A 5-Year Single-Center Experience in Nairobi, Kenya.Journal of tropical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical features of capsule endoscopy in 825 children: A single-center, retrospective cohort study.Medicine · 2020Article
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/
aimNo prior experience with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) has been published from Saudi Arabia. In this study, we aim to report the first Saudi experience with VCE. PATIENTS AND
methodsA prospective study was conducted between March 2013 and September 2017 at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Eligible patients underwent VCE and their data (age, sex, indication for VCE, type of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding [OGIB: overt vs occult], VCE findings, and complications) were recorded. Approval was obtained from the institutional ethics board before the study began and all patients provided verbal and signed consent for the procedure. The procedure was performed according to the established guidelines.
resultsDuring the study period, a total 103 VCE procedures were performed on 96 patients. Overall, 60 participants (62.5%) were male (mean age, 58.8 years; range, 25-97 years) and 36 (37.5%) were female (mean age, 52.8 years; range, 18-78 years). The most frequent indication for VCE was OGIB (n = 91, 88.35%; overt, n = 46, 50.55%; occult, n = 45, 49.45%). Other indications were suspected Crohn's disease (n = 4, 3.88%), suspected complicated celiac disease (n = 4, 3.88%), and unexplained chronic abdominal pain (n = 4, 3.88%). The VCE results were categorized as incomplete (n = 2, 1.94%), poor-quality (n = 7; 6.8%), normal (n = 39, 37.86%), and abnormal (n = 55, 53.4%). The completion rate was 98.06% (n = 101), and the overall diagnostic yield was 53.4%. Of the 55 patients with abnormal VCE results, 43 (78.2%) had small bowel (SB) abnormalities and 12 (21.8%) had abnormalities in the proximal or distal gut. The most frequent SB abnormalities were angiodysplasia (n = 22, 40.0%) and tumors (n = 7, 12.7%).
conclusionThe diagnostic yield of VCE for Saudi patients with OGIB is comparable to that reported internationally; however, data for other VCE indications, including inflammatory bowel disease, are still lacking.
Indexed as
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.