SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2022
Clinical Outcomes of Negative Balloon-Assisted Enteroscopy for Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- First Brazilian expert consensus for video capsule endoscopy and balloon-assisted enteroscopy.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Diverticular bleeding in the third part of the duodenum as a cause of overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: For patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), finding the bleeding site is challenging. Balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) has become the preferred diagnostic modality for OGIB. The long-term outcome of patients with negative BAE remains undefined. The present study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients with negative BAE results for OGIB and to clarify the effect of further investigations at the time of rebleeding with a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available cohort studies. Methods: Studies were searched through the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. The following indexes were analyzed: rebleeding rate after negative BAE, rebleeding rate after different follow-up periods, the proportion of patients who underwent further evaluation after rebleeding, the percentage of patients with identified rebleeding sources, and the percentage of patients with rebleeding sources in the small intestine. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I Results: Twelve studies that involved a total of 407 patients were included in the analysis. The pooled rebleeding rate after negative BAE for OGIB was 29.1% (95% CI: 17.2-42.6%). Heterogeneity was significant among the studies (I Conclusion: A negative result of BAE in patients with OGIB indicates a subsequently low risk of rebleeding. Further evaluation should be considered after rebleeding.
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.