ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2022
Octa-nonagenarians can perform video capsule endoscopy safely and with a higher diagnostic yield than 65-79-year-old patients.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Video Capsule Endoscopy: Think Pharyngeal Pouch - Retention of a Video Capsule in a 94-Year-Old in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract.Annals of geriatric medicine and research · 2025Article
- 2022 - Pros and Cons in General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2023Article
- Octa-nonagenarians can perform video capsule endoscopy safely and with a higher diagnostic yield than 65-79-year-old patients.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022Article
- Evaluating video capsule endoscopy in diabetes mellitus: transit times, preparation adequacy, and the influence of insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist use.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVideo capsule endoscopy (VCE) is an effective, noninvasive modality for small bowel (SB) investigation. Its usage in the older adults is rising. However, data in octa-nonagenarians regarding diagnostic yield and motility are lacking. Our aim was to evaluate and compare safety and efficacy of VCE between age subgroups of older adult patients.
methodsThis was a retrospective study of prospectively documented data. All consecutive VCEs of patients ≥65 years (01/2010-12/2017) were included. Patients unable to swallow the capsule or videos with significant recording technical malfunction were excluded. The cohort was divided into the younger group aged 65-79 years old and octa-nonagenarians aged ≥80 years old. Indications for referral, diagnostic yield and transit times were compared between groups.
resultsA total of 535 VCEs were performed in 499 older adult patients (51.2% males); 82.8% were 65-79 years old and 17.2% were ≥80 years old. The ≥80-year-old group had higher rates of clinically significant findings (52.7% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.025), active bleeding (12.5% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.053) and angioectasia (36.0% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.014). Crohn's disease was newly diagnosed in approximately 8% of the entire cohort and 12% of the ≥80 years old. Anemia was the most common indication in both groups, followed by overt bleeding in the ≥80-year-old group (25% vs. 9.9% in 65-79-year-old group, p < 0.001) and Crohn's disease in the 65-79 years old (17.2% vs. 5.4% in ≥80 years old, p = 0.004). Groups were comparable in transit time and cecal documentation rates.
conclusionsIn octa-nonagenarians, VCE is as safe as in younger older-adults with a higher diagnostic yield of significant and treatable conditions.
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.