ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2025
Diagnostic yield of video capsule endoscopy
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSmall-bowel disorders, including obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), Crohn's disease, and tumors, require accurate diagnostic approaches for effective treatment. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and simple balloon enteroscopy (SBE) are widely used; however, each modality has limitations, particularly regarding therapeutic intervention and diagnostic yield.
aimTo evaluate diagnostic yields of various modalities for small bowel bleeding, analyze factors affecting heterogeneity, and improve understanding of clinical outcomes associated with different diagnostic approaches.
methodsA comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) revealed over 600 citations related to the use of capsule endoscopy and balloon enteroscopy for diagnosing small intestine disorders with wall thickening. Based on predetermined eligibility criteria, seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies were analyzed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of VCE and SBE in patients with small bowel disorders. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was applied to evaluate the risk of bias and overall methodological quality.
resultsAnalysis of seven moderate-to-high-quality retrospective studies revealed comparable overall detection rates for small bowel lesions between VCE and SBE. VCE demonstrated superior performance in detecting vascular lesions. Conversely, SBE exhibited a higher efficacy in detecting ulcerative lesions. The overall diagnostic yield varied across studies, with VCE showing a range of 32%-83% for small bowel bleeding, whereas SBE demonstrated a higher overall detection rate of 69.7% compared to 57.6% for VCE (
conclusionVCE and SBE are complementary techniques for evaluating small intestinal disorders. Although VCE remains the initial test of choice for patients with stable OGIB, SBE should be considered in patients requiring therapeutic intervention. Thus, combining both modalities enhances diagnostic accuracy and patient management.
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.