ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2024
Early double-balloon enteroscopy was not related to better clinical outcomes in patients with suspected overt small bowel bleeding.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDevice-assisted enteroscopy has been used for over 20 years for the management of patients with suspected small bowel bleeding. Unlike esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy, the appropriate timing of enteroscopy is still unknown. In recent guidelines, early enteroscopy is suggested to maximize diagnostic yield and therapeutic yield in patients with suspected small bowel bleeding. However, few studies have identified its influence on clinical outcomes, including mortality or rebleeding rate. We conducted this study to evaluate the influence of the timing of double-balloon enteroscopy on clinical outcomes in patients with suspected small bowel bleeding.
methodsPatients with overt small bowel bleeding who underwent double-balloon enteroscopy from January 2013 to February 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized into an early enteroscopy group (≤14 days) and a nonearly enteroscopy group (>14 days). Clinical outcomes, including short-term mortality and rebleeding rate, long-term mortality and rebleeding rate, diagnostic yield, and therapeutic yield, were analyzed.
resultsA total of 100 patients (mean age, 66.2 years; 53% male) were included, and 44 patients were stratified into the early enteroscopy group. The diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, mortality, and rebleeding rate were similar between two groups. In multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis, there were no significant differences between two groups regarding the 30-day rebleeding rate (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.43; 95% CI, 0.47-4.33), 90-day rebleeding rate (aOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.47-2.94), 30-day mortality rate (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.21-8.13), 90-day mortality rate (aOR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.48-7.87), and 90-day bleeding-related mortality (aOR, 2.18; 95% CI, 0.24-19.52). The Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis showed that the timing of DBE was not associated with the long-term rebleeding rate or mortality rate ( p = 0.57 and 0.83, respectively).
conclusionThe timing of enteroscopy did not influence the clinical outcomes, including the short-term mortality rate, short-term rebleeding rate, long-term mortality rate, and rebleeding rate, in patients with suspected overt small bowel bleeding.
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.