Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38726559›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2024

Discordance Rate and Risk Factor of Other Diagnostic Modalities for Small Bowel Tumors Detected by Device-Assisted Enteroscopy: A Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Disease (KASID) Multicenter Study.

Jihye Park, Jin Su Kim, Joo Hye Song, Kwangwoo Nam, Seong-Eun Kim, Eui Sun Jeong, Jae Hyun Kim, Seong Ran Jeon

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
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.

Jihye ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5836-8735
Jin Su KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3397-3189
Joo Hye SongDepartment of Internal Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1166-0085
Kwangwoo NamDepartment of Gastroenterology, Dankook University Hospital, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3720-9820
Seong-Eun KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6310-5366
Eui Sun JeongDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8569-9380
Jae Hyun KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kosin University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4272-8003
Seong Ran JeonInstitute for Digestive Research, Digestive Disease Center, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6970-9737

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Despite advances in imaging and endoscopic technology, diagnostic modalities for small bowel tumors are simultaneously performed. We investigated the discrepancy rate between each modality and predictive factors of discrepancy in patients with definite small bowel tumors. Methods: Data of patients with definite small bowel tumors who underwent both device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) and computed tomography (CT) were retrieved from web-based enteroscopy registry database in Korea. Predictive risk factors associated with discrepancy were analyzed using logistic regression analysis. Results: Among 998 patients, 210 (21.0%) were diagnosed with small bowel tumor using DAE, in 193 patients with definite small bowel tumor, DAE and CT were performed. Of these patients, 12 (6.2%) showed discrepancy between examinations. Among 49 patients who underwent DAE and video capsule endoscopy (VCE) examination, 13 (26.5%) showed discrepancy between examinations. No significant independent risk factors were associated with concordance between DAE and CT in multivariate logistic regression analysis among the patients. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, red blood cell transfusion was negatively associated with concordance between DAE and VCE in patients with small bowel tumor (odds ratio, 0.163; 95% confidence interval, 0.026 to 1.004; p=0.050). Conclusions: For small bowel tumors, the discrepancy rate between DAE and CT was 6.2%, and 26.5% between DAE and VCE. Despite developments in cross-sectional imaging (VCE and DAE modalities), discrepancies still exist. For small bowel bleeding that require significant transfusion while showing insignificant VCE findings, DAE should be considered as the next diagnostic approach, considering the possibility of missed small bowel tumor.

Indexed as

Capsule EndoscopyIntestinal NeoplasmsIntestine, SmallTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedErythrocyte TransfusionFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsBalloon enteroscopyCapsule endoscopyNeoplasmsTomographyX-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID38726559
PMCPMC11249927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.