ArticleScientific reports2022
Modified method of patency judgement using patency capsule prior to capsule endoscopy in clinical practice.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patency Capsule and Cross-Sectional Imaging for Predicting Capsule Endoscopy Retention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- A case of incorrect evaluation of intestinal patency by early dissolution of a patency capsule.DEN open · 2024Article
- Robotic Pills as Innovative Personalized Medicine Tools: A Mini Review.Recent advances in drug delivery and formulation · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2012, Japan approved the use of a tag-less patency capsule (PC), which evaluates gastrointestinal patency before small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). This study aimed to evaluate the validity of our modification on the passage criteria for this PC in clinical practice. We retrospectively enrolled 326 consecutive patients who underwent PC examination before SBCE. If X-ray could not reveal the PC in the body during the judgement time (30-33 h after ingestion), we defined it as 'estimated patency' and performed SBCE. We employed plain computed tomography (CT) for the second judgement, as needed. The overall patency rate was 95.1%. By X-ray, 41 (12.6%) patients were judged to have 'estimated patency', and SBCE could be safely performed. Plain CT judgement was necessary in 106 patients (32.5%). One PC case had a residual coating film associated with stenosis in a patient with Crohn's disease (CD), and one (0.3%) SBCE case had capsule retention resulting from false CT judgement. Multivariate analysis revealed that established CD and inpatient were factors related to no-patency. In conclusion, PC is useful for examining gastrointestinal patency, keeping in mind CT misjudgement. If PC was not found in the body via X-ray, performing SBCE as 'estimated patency' seemed appropriate.
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.