ArticleClinical and experimental gastroenterology2020
Poor Quality of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Images Has a Significant Negative Effect in the Diagnosis of Small Bowel Malignancy.
Article in Clinical and experimental gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Study of MiroCam MC2000 and PillCam SB3 in Detecting Small Bowel Bleeding: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Crossover Study.Gut and liver · 2025Trial
- Post-Capsule Endoscopy Small Bowel Cancer Rates: Toward a Meaningful Quality Metric.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Reading of small bowel capsule endoscopy after frame reduction using an artificial intelligence algorithm.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- The Role of Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis and Management of Small Bowel Tumors: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Small Bowel Video Capsule Endoscopy Guidance in Practice: Expert Opinion Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Small bowel cleanliness in capsule endoscopy: a case-control study using validated artificial intelligence algorithm.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of an Artificial Intelligence Model for Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Video Review.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Lavage, Simethicone, and Prokinetics-What to Swallow with a Video Capsule.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsCapsule endoscopy (CE) is a visual modality; hence, diagnosis relies on image quality. We studied the contribution of image parameters to visualization quality and their effect on diagnostic certainty of small bowel (SB) lesions.
methodsFive clear CE images of common SB pathology - two vascular lesions, two inflammatory, one polyp - were processed for three image parameters to simulate poor SB conditions: opacity (color-matched to luminal content; 10-90%, 10% increments); blurriness (radius 1-10 pixels; one pixel increments); and contrast (-50-50%; 10% increments). Nine expert readers evaluated whether images were adequate for diagnosis. Points where perception of image quality changed significantly were determined for each parameter. Three further sets of SBCE images (vascular, inflammatory, and neoplastic lesions; nine images/set) were processed for four points/parameters. Twenty experienced/expert CE readers reviewed these images.
resultsThe negative effects of opacity in diagnostic certainty were mostly evident in images of neoplasia; images of vascular and inflammatory lesions were less affected. Similar results were observed with increasing blur radius, simulating movement, and poor focus. The proportions of readers finding vascular and inflammatory images adequate for diagnosis did not drop significantly at wider blur radii, while images of neoplasia were quickly deemed inadequate. Low contrast had a greater negative effect than high, most consistently in neoplastic lesions.
conclusionPoor visualization quality in all parameters affected mostly neoplastic lesions. Software to increase contrast and sharpen images can improve visualization quality; smart frame rate adaptation could improve the number of high-quality frames obtained. Thoroughness in SB cleansing is most important when there is a suspicion of neoplasia.
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.