ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2020
Diagnosis and therapy using double-balloon endoscopy for small bowel disease: experience from a Chinese tertiary hospital.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2020. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Achieving Total Enteroscopy by Consecutive Bidirectional Double-balloon Enteroscopy Procedures.Current medical science · 2022Article
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
objectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of double-balloon endoscopy (DBE) for small bowel disease (SBD).
methodsThe clinical and endoscopic data of patients who underwent DBE in a Chinese tertiary hospital from January 2006 to December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into three groups by age: the young group (<45 years), middle-aged group (45-65 years), and older group (>65 years).
resultsIn total, 1177 patients who underwent 2134 DBE procedures were included. The anterograde and retrograde route was used in 1111 and 1023 procedures, respectively. The most common reason for performing DBE was suspected small bowel bleeding (SSBB) (53.1%), and the most common SBD was Crohn's disease (CD) (18.1%). Hemostasis was the predominant endoscopic therapy (54.3%). The total complication rate was 0.8%. The incidence of CD was highest in the young group, and the incidence of tumors was highest in the older group; these findings were consistent both among the overall patient population and among patients with SSBB.
conclusionsDBE is effective and safe for the diagnosis and treatment of SBD and is considered to have great potential as a first-line method for diagnosing SBD.
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.