ArticleDEN open2025
Clinical usefulness and acceptability of small-bowel capsule endoscopy with panoramic imaging compared with axial imaging in Japanese patients.
Article in DEN open, 2025. 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.
- Review of Gastrointestinal Capsule Robots: Materials, Actuation, Diagnostics, and Therapeutics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Efficacy and Clinical Aspects of Panoramic-View Versus Forward-View Capsule Endoscopy for Suspected Small Bowel Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Recent technological advances in video capsule endoscopy: a comprehensive review.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the usefulness and acceptability of CapsoCam Plus (CapsoCam) in Japanese patients. Methods: This retrospective single-center study enrolled 930 patients with suspected small-bowel bleeding (SSBB) who underwent capsule endoscopy. Thirty-three patients using CapsoCam and PillCam SB3 (SB3) were matched using propensity score matching. The diagnostic yield and the acceptability of CapsoCam were evaluated. Results: There was no SSBB case where capsule endoscopy was performed within 48 h of bleeding. CapsoCam had a significantly higher observation rate of the entire small bowel (97% vs. 73%, Conclusions: CapsoCam took time to read; however, it is a well-tolerated examination with a high observation rate of Vater's papilla and entire small-bowel mucosa. Detectability of bleeding sources was comparable in both modalities for cases of occult SSBB and overt SSBB more than 48 h after bleeding. CapsoCam is a useful modality for patients with SSBB.
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.