ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2023
Utility of early colonoscopy for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of age and drug use on lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective single-center experience.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Delphi consensus statement for the management of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice of healthcare professionals towards irritable bowel syndrome: a multicenter, cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early colonoscopy (within 8-24 h) is recommended in different guidelines for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Despite this recommendation, evidence for its effectiveness are conflicting, and early colonoscopy is often not performed. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the utility of early colonoscopy by examining the findings during the procedure, and by comparing in-hospital and long-term outcomes between patients who did and did not undergo early colonoscopy. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study based on the electronic medical records of a large tertiary hospital in Israel. Methods: All patients hospitalized with acute LGIB to acute wards between 2012 and 2022 were included. First, structured and free-text procedure notes from patients who did undergo early colonoscopy were examined. Second, we compared in-hospital and long-term outcomes between patients who did and did not undergo early colonoscopy while adjusting for possible confounders using multivariable regression of the type appropriate for each outcome. Results: Overall, 953 patients were included, of which 90 underwent early colonoscopy. The majority (54%) were found insufficiently prepared. Common findings were diverticulosis (38%) and colon polyps (20%). The procedure was effective for hemostasis in only 13% of the cases. Early colonoscopy was not significantly associated with increased survival (exponentiated coefficient = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.76, 1.87), decreased length of hospitalization (exponentiated coefficient = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.21), or increased blood hemoglobin at discharge (coefficient =-0.27, 95% CI: -0.58, 0.03). Conclusions: Early colonoscopy was often not effective and was not associated with significantly improved outcomes.
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.