ArticleClinical endoscopy2025
Endoscopic assessment of terminal ileum in screening colonoscopy: is it worth the effort?
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 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.
- Endoscopic assessment of terminal ileum in screening colonoscopy: insights from a retrospective analysis.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Terminal ileum in screening colonoscopy: routine practice or risk-stratified approach?Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Is routine terminal ileum intubation justified during screening colonoscopy? Evidence from a regional screening program.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening colonoscopies often do not include terminal ileum assessment. In this study, we examined how often endoscopists assessed the terminal ileum during screening colonoscopy, how it influenced the procedure time and patient comfort, and whether it revealed pathological findings.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the screening colonoscopy examinations performed in our department between 2017 and 2021. We retrieved the procedure duration (minutes), patient age and sex, pain scale, and screening colonoscopy results.
resultsA total of 2,449 screening colonoscopy examinations were performed between 2017 and 2021. The patients were classified into one of two groups: the cecum reached or the terminal ileum intubated. These two groups did not significantly differ in sex or reported pain score, while the patients were significantly younger (55.2±6.5 vs. 56.2±6 years, p=0.015) and the colonoscopy duration was longer (22.8±9.8 vs. 18±10.5 min, p<0.001) in the terminal ileum group. Pathological conditions (nonspecific inflammatory lesions) in the small intestine were reported in 5/297 patients.
conclusionsSmall intestine intubation was associated with a significantly longer colonoscopy duration and revealed pathological conditions of no apparent clinical significance.
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.