Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36561789›Full record

ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2023

Positioning intestinal ultrasound in a UK tertiary centre: significant estimated clinical role and cost savings.

Raphael P Luber, Bianca Petri, Susanna Meade, Sailish Honap, Sebastian Zeki, Krisztina B Gecse, Nyree Griffin, Peter M Irving

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Raphael P LuberDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5508-9055
Bianca PetriDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Susanna MeadeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sailish HonapDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sebastian ZekiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Krisztina B GecseDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nyree GriffinDepartment of Radiology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Peter M IrvingDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0972-8148
St Thomas' Hospital · GBAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is an inexpensive, non-invasive method of diagnosing and monitoring inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to establish the proportion of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies (LGIEs) and magnetic resonance enterographies (MREs) that could have been performed as IUS, the potential pathology miss-rates if IUS was used and the associated cost savings. Methods: All MREs and LGIEs performed for either assessment of IBD activity or investigation of possible IBD, performed at a single UK tertiary centre in January 2018, were retrospectively reviewed against predetermined criteria for IUS suitability. Case outcomes were recorded and cost of investigation if IUS was performed instead was calculated. Results: 73 of 260 LGIEs (28.1%) and 58 of 105 MREs (55.2%) met the criteria for IUS suitability. Among potential IUS-suitable endoscopy patients, one case each of a <5 mm adenoma and sessile serrated lesion were found; no other significant pathology that would be expected to be missed with IUS was encountered. Among IUS-suitable MRE patients, no cases of isolated upper gastrointestinal inflammation likely to be missed by IUS were found, and extraintestinal findings not expected to be seen on IUS were of limited clinical significance. The predicted cost saving over 1 month if IUS was used instead was £8642, £25 866 and £5437 for MRE, colonoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy patients, respectively. Conclusion: There is a significant role for IUS, with annual projected cost savings of up to almost £500 000 at our centre. Non-inflammatory or non-gastrointestinal pathology predicted to be missed in this cohort was of limited clinical significance.

Indexed as

Cost-effectivenessendoscopyGastrointestinal ultrasoundInflammatory bowel diseaseMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID36561789
PMCPMC9763649
OpenAlexW4284968255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.