ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2021
Risk factors of interventional radiology/surgery for colonic diverticular bleeding.
Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2021. 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.
- Successful endoscopic hemostasis compared to transarterial embolization in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding.Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of Clipping for Definitive Colonic Diverticular Bleeding in Preventing Early Recurrent Bleeding.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2022Article
- Predictors of in-hospital outcomes for diverticular bleeding patients: a retrospective analysis of National Inpatient Sample data (2016-2020).Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
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 AND
aimColonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) stops spontaneously, but sometimes, excessive bleeding does not allow hemostasis and requires interventional radiology (IR)/surgery. We examined risk factors in patients who required IR/surgery for CDB and late recurrent bleeding rate after IR/surgery.
methodsThis retrospective case-control study was conducted at a tertiary center. We included 608 patients who required hospitalization for CDB. Patients were investigated for risk factors using logistic regression analysis. We also investigated early and late recurrent bleeding rates following IR/surgery.
resultsIn 261 patients (42.9%), the bleeding source was identified, and endoscopic hemostasis was performed; 23 (3.8%) required IR/surgery. In multivariate analysis, shock state with a blood pressure of ≤90 mmHg (
conclusionsAlthough IR/surgery is an effective hemostatic treatment wherein endoscopic treatment is unsuccessful, late recurrent bleeding cannot be prevented.
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.