Trial reportWorld journal of clinical cases2021
Comparison of white-light endoscopy, optical-enhanced and acetic-acid magnifying endoscopy for detecting gastric intestinal metaplasia: A randomized trial.
Trial report in World journal of clinical cases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of image-enhanced endoscopy for the diagnosis of gastric intestinal metaplasia.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Optimizing endoscopic detection of precancerous gastric conditions: Single-center prospective study.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Comparing Raman Spectroscopy-Based Artificial Intelligence to High-Definition White Light Endoscopy for Endoscopic Diagnosis of Gastric Neoplasia: A Feasibility Proof-of-Concept Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Design, fabrication, and preclinical testing of a miniaturized, multispectral, chip-on-tip, imaging probe for intraluminal fluorescence imaging of the gastrointestinal tract.Frontiers in photonics · 2023Article
- Role of Endoscopy in Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Value of Magnifying Chromoendoscopy and Magnifying Optical Enhancement Technology in Classifying Colorectal Polyps: A Prospective Controlled Study.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2021Article
- The Role of Endoscopic Grading of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia (EGGIM) in Assessing the Extent and Degree of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia.Journal of digestive diseasesArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a precancerous lesion of the stomach, which severely affects human life and health. Currently, a variety of endoscopic techniques are used to screen/evaluate GIM. Traditional white-light endoscopy (WLE) and acetic-acid chromoendoscopy combined with magnifying endoscopy (ME-AAC) are the interventions of choice due to their diagnostic efficacy for GIM. Optical-enhanced magnifying endoscopy (ME-OE) is a new virtual chromoendoscopy technique to identify GIM, which combines bandwidth-limited light and image enhancement processing technology to enhance the detection of mucosal and vascular details. We hypothesized that ME-OE is superior to WLE and ME-AAC in the evaluation of GIM.
aimTo directly compare the diagnostic value of WLE, ME-AAC, and ME-OE for detection of GIM.
methodsA total of 156 patients were subjected to consecutive upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examinations using WLE, ME-AAC, and ME-OE. Histopathological findings were utilized as the reference standard. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the three endoscopy methods in the diagnosis of GIM were evaluated. Moreover, the time to diagnosis with ME-AAC and ME-OE was analyzed. Two experts and two non-experts evaluated the GIM images diagnosed using ME-OE, and diagnostic accuracy and intra- and inter-observer agreement were analyzed.
resultsGIM was detected in 68 of 156 patients (43.6%). The accuracy of ME-OE was highest (91.7%), followed by ME-AAC (86.5%), while that of WLE (51.9%) was lowest. Per-site analysis showed that the overall diagnostic accuracy of ME-OE was higher than that of ME-AAC (
conclusionFor endoscopists, especially experienced endoscopists, ME-OE is an efficient, convenient, and time-saving endoscopic technique that should be used for the diagnosis of GIM.
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.