ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Push enteroscopy and colonoscopy in melena patients with negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy: Prospective multicenter study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Proper evaluation of patients with melena, no hematemesis, and nondiagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is poorly defined. Guidelines recommend colonoscopy, but the additional diagnostic yield is low. Owing to the high likelihood of proximal small bowel bleeding, push enteroscopy (PE) may be beneficial. Patients and methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter cohort study from four referral centers. Consecutive patients with melena, no hematemesis, and negative EGD results underwent PE followed by colonoscopy. For patients with culprit lesions found on PE and who were at risk of undergoing colonoscopy, colonoscopy was not performed and results were presumed to be negative. Diagnostic yields of both investigations were compared. Results: Of 221 eligible patients who underwent EGD, 77 (34.8%) with nondiagnostic results were included in the analyses. Mean age of participants was 67.8 years and 51.9% were men. Culprit lesions were identified on PE in 27 of 77 patients (35.0%). Colonoscopy was performed in 59 patients and the source of bleeding was found in 10 patients (12.9%). Diagnostic yield of PE was significantly greater than that of colonoscopy ( Conclusions: PE is beneficial for patients with melena and nondiagnostic EGD. It should be considered before or in combination with colonoscopy for these patients.
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.