ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence-aided capsule endoscopy (TOP100) in overt small bowel bleeding.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Capsule Endoscopy Versus Conventional Capsule Endoscopy for Detection of Small Bowel Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Pooled it
- Improved Efficiency and Lesion Detection in Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Using the Open-Source Artificial Intelligence Model SEE-AI.DEN open · 2027Article
- Evaluating the Performance of the TOP100 Tool in Detecting Key Small Bowel Findings at Capsule Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Integration of Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Capsule Endoscopy in Clinical Practice: A Review of Market-Available Tools for Clinical Practice.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Review
- Localization and etiological stratification of non-neoplastic small bowel bleeding via CT imaging: a 10-year study.Insights into imaging · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCapsule endoscopy (CE) is the first-choice exploration in case of overt small bowel bleeding (SBB). An early CE is known to increase diagnostic yield, but long reading times may delay therapeutics. The study evaluates the diagnostic performance of the artificial intelligence tool TOP100 in patients with overt SBB undergoing early CE with Pillcam SB3.
methodsPatients who underwent early CE (up to 14 days from the bleeding episode) for suspected overt SBB were included. One experienced endoscopist prospectively performed standard reading (SR) and a second blind experienced endoscopist performed a TOP100-based reading (TR). The primary endpoint was TR diagnostic accuracy for lesions with high bleeding potential (P2).
resultsA total of 111 patients were analyzed. The most common clinical presentation was melena (64%). CE showed angiodysplasias in 40.5% of patients (45/111). In per-patient analysis, TR showed a sensitivity of 90.48% (95% CI 82.09-95.80), specificity of 100% (95% CI 87.23-100) with a PPV of 100% (95% CI 94.01-100), NPV of 77.14% (95% CI 63.58-86.71) and diagnostic accuracy of 92.79 (86.29-96.84). At multivariate analysis, adequate intestinal cleansing was the only independent predictor of concordance between TR and SR (OR 2.909, p = 0.019). The median reading time for SR and TR was 23 min (18.0-26.8) and 1.9 min (range 1.7-2.1), respectively (p < 0.001).
conclusionsTOP100 provides a fast-reading mode for early CE in case of overt small bowel bleeding. It identifies most patients with active bleeding and angiodysplasias, aiding in the prioritization of therapeutic procedures. However, its accuracy in detecting ulcers, varices and P1 lesions seems insufficient.
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.