ArticleCanadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology2020
Analysis and Follow up of Endoscopy Results in 1099 Patients with Terminal Ileum Lesions.
Article in Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Characteristics and Etiology of Terminal Ileum Ulcers: A Retrospective Study.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Histological Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Significance of the First Biopsy in Device-Assisted Enteroscopy in Patients with Small Bowel Diseases: A KASID Multicenter Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The efficacy of mesalazine on nonspecific terminal ileal ulcers: A randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We aim to analyze the diagnostic yield, diagnostic accuracy, and delayed diagnosis of patients with terminal ileum lesions, providing follow-up suggestions for suspected patients. Methods: We carried out an analysis of 1099 patients who had terminal ileum lesions in our hospital from 2009 to 2019. The endoscopy reports and histopathology reports of terminal ileal biopsies were recorded. Clinical diagnosis and management were reviewed to determine whether there was a need to correct after a follow-up endoscopy result. Results: A total of 1099 patients were found to have terminal ileum lesions, among which 959 in 1099 patients (87.26%) were diagnosed as benign, 17 in 1099 patients (1.55%) were diagnosed as malignant, and 123 in 1099 patients (11.19%) were diagnosed as suspected. The diagnostic accuracies of terminal ileal polyp, cyst, cancer, eosinophilic enteritis, parasite, lymphofollicular hyperplasia, and amyloidosis were 100%. The diagnosis was delayed in 9.93% of Crohn's disease (CD) and 12.5% of lymphoma. Among the definite cases, the diagnosis was corrected during the follow-up in 12.5% of the patients, while the clinical treatment was corrected during the follow-up in 17.86% of the patients. Among the suspected cases, the diagnosis and treatment was corrected in 61.11% of the patients during the follow-up. Conclusion: Coincident diagnosis of ileitis and ileum ulcer is low. Delayed diagnosis of Crohn's disease and lymphoma were observed in a certain proportion of patients with terminal ileum lesions. A follow-up endoscopy was strongly recommended for these suspected patients with terminal ileum lesions.
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.